In a case that is garnering a lot of attention in Pennsylvania, Terrance “Terry” Williams is scheduled to die October 3rd for the death of Amos Norwood, whom Williams alleges sexually assaulted him.
A judge, however, has asked for a hearing to be held so he can hear testimony about how the prosecutors withheld the fact that Norwood had allegedly violently raped Williams the night before. Norwood has also been accused of touching many other young boys in the church where he was employed.
Five jurors have stepped forward to say that they would have handed down a life in prison sentence had they had all the evidence.
If Williams is put to death on October 3rd, he will be the first person to be non-voluntarily put to death in Pennsylvania in 50 years (that is to say, the first death row convict to be put to death who has appealed his sentence.)
What do you think of this case? Should Terry Williams be held to his original sentence for the grisly crime? If not, should any punishment be handed down to the prosecutor in the original trial?
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/17/13916420-penn-board-rejects-clemency-in-murder-case-execution-still-planned
Penn. board rejects clemency in murder case, execution still planned- well that is a bag of suck in my book.
Here we go. Just found the legal guidelines regarding withholding potentially exculpatory evidence. The United States has a duty under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), to provide favorable evidence to the defendant. United States v. Blanco, 392 F.3d 382, 387 (9th Cir.2004). Not only must a prosecutor disclose favorable evidence of which he personally is aware, but also he must ask others who are involved in the prosecution whether they are aware of any favorable evidence. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995). “[S]uppression… Read more »
The prosecutor should not withhold potentially mitigating evidence. However, I’m wondering if Williams told his own attorney about the sexual abuse? There is no mention in the article that Williams ever claimed to have been sexually abused or claimed that he was motivated by anger about the sexual abuse. There is no mention that his attorney tried to put it into evidence.
That said, I’m opposed to the death penalty.
If he truly was abused to a considerable degree then I probably wouldn’t care if he shot the abuser. If it was just a grope, then murder is too far, but I’d let him off for hitting the abuser. But then again it’s probably better the lawyers etc handle that stuff, I can be a bit medieval in thought, if I were raped now I’d probably wanna kill the rapist if they weren’t given a severe punishment by the courts…
It’s not okay to kill someone because they raped you or did something bad to you. We all have people we’d like to kill but if you are a sane person – YOU DON’T ACT ON THAT URGE! Murder is wrong in every case except self-defense. Making exceptions should never be okay. You don’t get to play God. You don’t get to decide who lives or dies. Now we’ll see lots of cases of people murdering other people, then using the “abuse excuse”. I was raped and I got over it. I will never understand the puritan mentality of most… Read more »
“If it was just a grope, then murder is too far, but I’d let him off for hitting the abuser. ”
Who are you to say what “too far” is? Murder is wrong in every case except self-defense, that’s what the law says. Stop using the “abuse excuse.”
Of course I’d love for people to the police after, but it’s a traumatic event, it does affect people and their judgments especially just after the attack. If it’s an ongoing abuse and the cops aren’t doing anything, should we punish a murder the same as other murders? It’s not the right or just thing to do, but I can see how and why it happens. People don’t always think rationally after a trauma like that, and I believe that’s already a mitigating factor. I know murder is wrong, but if I was raped I’d surely feel a hell of… Read more »
Actually the law says that normally sane people committing insane actions seconds after a seriously traumatic event is a valid defense. It’s called “temporary insanity.” Very different from a vengeance killing like what this is in a legal sense, but the difference is the elapsed length of time, not the mental state of the victim-turned-agressor.
If the rape allegations are plausible and the prosecutor withheld this evidence then: Prosecuted should be fired, disbarred and his pension should be jerked. Then let him earn a living based upon performance like piece work roofing. It is obscene that prosecutors think their job is to keep up the batting average. This guy is a public servant- he had a responsibility to see justice done and in my book it is entirely possible that Terry Williams served up justice… I ponder from time to time timely justice and revenge- In June a Texas Father beat a man to death,… Read more »
Oops it is certainly much more complicated than – man rapes boy, boy kills man….Williams has also been convicted of another assault on a child molester…
Maybe he’s an avenger?
Maybe the death penalty is a terrible wasted of the taxpayers money.
“In June a Texas Father beat a man to death, within minutes of him being caught raping his 4 year old and sensibly he was never charged” Sensibly? Hmmm, last time I checked murder was against the law. But people like to use the abuse excuse to justify violence. Good for him? He’s a murderer. Are you saying murder should only be illegal if the murder victim is a saint? It’s not okay to kill people, even bad people. Murderers and pro-vigilante types are more of a threat to society than rapists. But Americans say sex is worse than violence,… Read more »
@how – in the TX case I understand the father mortally wounded the perpetrator in the course of stopping the rape. So in my world it is a no brainer. He is not a murderer he was protecting his family. Murder,is illegal, killing isn’t always. Sometimes killing and murder are justifiable- in my world… I also believe in putting out fires and shooting mad dogs- but then I’m not very civilized,or evolved. I’m not sure what is right- hence my,discussion of violence within time parameters. & incidentally you sound pretty damned healthy, to me, vis what seems to be an… Read more »
Legally it IS sometimes justifiable. That’s why there are extremely strict discovery laws in criminal proceedings. ANY AND ALL potentially exculpatory evidence the prosecution uncovers has to be shared with the defendant in discovery. I’m surprised that this is actually an issue. I believe when something like this occurs the proper legal course is an acquittal. It goes to the heart of the “fair trial by your peers” issue. In a less legalistic sense, I’m right there with you but probably more extreme. I DO, in fact, have no problem with vigilante justice against rapists… by the victim. Being a… Read more »