Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Tuesday, December sixteenth, and an
Speaker 1: execution that was scheduled for tomorrow night has been halted
Speaker 1: with just hours to spare. You could argue, but this
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that this death row inmates life is about
Speaker 1: to be spared with that. Welcome to this episode of
Speaker 1: Amy and t J and Robes. This is happening. A
Speaker 1: lot is happening with executions this year, just as now
Speaker 1: we're getting a new report that shows support for the
Speaker 1: death penalty is at the lowest level we've seen in
Speaker 1: fifty years, but the numbers of executions at the highest
Speaker 1: numbers we've seen are a lot.
Speaker 2: That is a strange hyah, how do you make that
Speaker 2: work shift there? Because it's interesting. You've got a state
Speaker 2: like Florida and Governor DeSantis trying to say, hey, if
Speaker 2: we are legalizing executions and we've sent people to death,
Speaker 2: why are people on death row for up to four decades.
Speaker 2: Let's get some closure and some justice for these families.
Speaker 2: And so he's pushing a lot of execution forward. Number
Speaker 2: nineteen is scheduled for later this week. But yeah, there's
Speaker 2: been a lot of news, a lot of headlines and
Speaker 2: a lot of questioning not just to the legality but
Speaker 2: to the morality of what we do here in this country.
Speaker 1: And look, that debate will of course continue. The other
Speaker 1: part of that's come up in a handful of cases
Speaker 1: literally is about guilt or innocence. Correct, that we're close
Speaker 1: to possibly condemning someone and putting someone to death, it's
Speaker 1: something that we can't take back with some questions about
Speaker 1: their guilt or innocence. Now, this week we were supposed
Speaker 1: to see Rope. Yes, Christmas is next week. We were
Speaker 1: wrapping up the year here in this country by getting
Speaker 1: two more executions on the books. That would have been
Speaker 1: the forty seventh and forty eighth if I have that correct,
Speaker 1: I say would have been because right now one has
Speaker 1: been halted. And this was one rogues we were keeping
Speaker 1: an eye on in Georgia that there were some questions
Speaker 1: they were trying to get it stopped. But now another
Speaker 1: reason has popped up. But we'll tell you who we're
Speaker 1: talking about.
Speaker 2: First of all, yes, we're talking about fifty two year
Speaker 2: old Stacey See Humphreys. He was convicted in a double
Speaker 2: murder back in two thousand and three. And yes, we've
Speaker 2: seen his attorneys over the last couple of weeks, which
Speaker 2: is very oftentimes the case, trying lots of different reasons
Speaker 2: or ways to try and get this executed. Execution stayed
Speaker 2: and he had a clemency hearing actually scheduled for today.
Speaker 2: So his lawyers have been working diligently around the clock
Speaker 2: trying to get some movement or at least trying to
Speaker 2: stop the execution. And turns out something worked, at least temporarily.
Speaker 1: So well, the courts had been turning them down left
Speaker 1: and right. They were making all kinds of arguments about
Speaker 1: the execution. Every judge, every court has said no, no, no, no, no.
Speaker 1: Now something else has happened. Because there was an order
Speaker 1: issued yesterday on Monday, again this is Monday, which would
Speaker 1: have been two days before the planned execution. This Parole
Speaker 1: Board issued an order suspending I think that's the word
Speaker 1: they use, suspending his execution scheduled for tomorrow night. They
Speaker 1: did this and didn't really give any clarity. They didn't
Speaker 1: explain why, but they said his execution is now on.
Speaker 2: Hold, correct, and his clemency hearing, which was scheduled for
Speaker 2: today has been postponed until further notice. So they have
Speaker 2: not said when they're going to reschedule that, and it
Speaker 2: would appear as though you would need to have a
Speaker 2: clemency hearing. And this was scheduled the day before his
Speaker 2: scheduled execution. So if they can't put together the clemency hearing,
Speaker 2: it makes a lot of sense why they had to
Speaker 2: postpone his actual execution. Now here's the deal. They do
Speaker 2: have a death warrant. I believe that was signed December third.
Speaker 2: It was, It was signed a couple weeks ago, and
Speaker 2: it's valid through noon on Christmas Eve.
Speaker 3: So they have until then.
Speaker 2: Literally to figure out what they're doing with this clemency hearing,
Speaker 2: which would then clear the way for the execution.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, if you just stopped there for a second,
Speaker 1: he's going to make it to twenty twenty six. Who's
Speaker 1: working on Christmas week trying to kill a guy?
Speaker 2: And there's a lot of confusion as to what they
Speaker 2: have to get in place in order to make this
Speaker 2: clemency hearing fair.
Speaker 1: And the guy we're talking about here, this is some
Speaker 1: pretty heinous stuff. Malice murder, that is what they called
Speaker 1: it down in Georgia. Malice murders what he was convicted
Speaker 1: of in two thousand and three. Killed two women, young women,
Speaker 1: Laurie Brown who's twenty one, Cindy Williams, thirty three. OK,
Speaker 1: if you done down in those areas, you know, model homes,
Speaker 1: a lot of subdivisions pop up and they put it's
Speaker 1: usually kind of not a lot of traffic, to be honest,
Speaker 1: in those neighborhoods. But the couple people, a couple of
Speaker 1: real estate agents. They were stationed in a model home
Speaker 1: trying to sell this neighborhood. He comes in, ties them up,
Speaker 1: forces them to strip naked, essentially tortures them so that
Speaker 1: they will give their pen numbers to their ATM and
Speaker 1: sure enough later thousand of dollars are taken out of
Speaker 1: their accounts. But he killed these women, shot these two women.
Speaker 1: That was the scene. So he is convicted of some
Speaker 1: pretty horrific There's not questions at least in this about
Speaker 1: guilt or innocence.
Speaker 2: No. I believe he even admitted to police early on
Speaker 2: that he was responsible and gave an explanation that he
Speaker 2: needed that. I think he ended up getting three thousand
Speaker 2: dollars and he needed that money because he had taken
Speaker 2: out some high interest loans in a new vehicle, and
Speaker 2: so just the callousness that he would just disregard to
Speaker 2: young women's lives Cindy Williams thirty three, Lorie Brown, twenty one,
Speaker 2: because he needed some cash to pay off some loans
Speaker 2: that he had taken on irresponsibly. That's about as disgusting
Speaker 2: as it gets.
Speaker 1: So a lot of routes they tried, at least his
Speaker 1: legal team in the courts failed, failed, failed every time
Speaker 1: along the way. But this is why now it appears
Speaker 1: he had a shot to survive. I guess Robes just
Speaker 1: passed tomorrow because the reasons now it's been halted don't
Speaker 1: necessarily point to his innocence or a court action. This
Speaker 1: seems Robes, it seems to me just a delay. Is
Speaker 1: not fair to say this is just a dela.
Speaker 3: It seems as though this is inevitable.
Speaker 2: It is almost certainly going to happen, because, yes, it's
Speaker 2: not a question of guilt or innocence. It's not a
Speaker 2: question as to whether or not he received a fair trial.
Speaker 2: It's not a question about anything that Typically we would
Speaker 2: see execution stayed for and a life in prison sentence
Speaker 2: imposed in lieu of an execution.
Speaker 3: That is not this case.
Speaker 2: This is about a parole board, which is comprised of
Speaker 2: five members, and he would need three of those board
Speaker 2: members to say and to vote for clemency for him
Speaker 2: to have a shot at not being executed on Wednesday,
Speaker 2: which was when he was originally scheduled for. But now
Speaker 2: two of those members, they claim his lawyer's team claim,
Speaker 2: have a conflict of interest in making their decision.
Speaker 1: So yes, if two of the five needs to recuse themselves,
Speaker 1: then there's only three people left on the board to vote.
Speaker 1: His attorneys arguing he has the right to a full
Speaker 1: five members, and that is why we have a delay.
Speaker 1: They're trying to figure out how much time do we
Speaker 1: get to possibly get two more in there. There are
Speaker 1: folks from the state who are arguing there's nothing that
Speaker 1: says he is legally has the right to five people
Speaker 1: three can vote, So that is the hold up. But
Speaker 1: it does appear at least right now he is going
Speaker 1: to live to I don't know, to fight another day.
Speaker 1: But he is going to get to live another day
Speaker 1: because it is the understanding he is going to get
Speaker 1: a clemency hearing. When can you put this together quickly enough?
Speaker 1: The judge say, quickly enough. Now just the three is fine,
Speaker 1: and then where's everybody going on for Christmas? What's happening?
Speaker 1: And clock is ticking. We got to kill this guy
Speaker 1: before Santa Coms is what we're up against in Georgia.
Speaker 2: It's a a cob deadline this time of year certainly
Speaker 2: to even consider. But yes, I mean it looked as though,
Speaker 2: I mean, it was curious to me that the parole
Speaker 2: board decided to go ahead, maybe just out of an
Speaker 2: abundance of caution, to just go ahead and say, let's
Speaker 2: just put this on pause, because it does seem as
Speaker 2: though the three members would be enough, according to state
Speaker 2: law for him to get a fair shake at clemency,
Speaker 2: to have those three members say yes or no.
Speaker 1: Would you want the five though if you're like.
Speaker 3: Of course you would, of course you would yes.
Speaker 1: And maybe you take inventory. Maybe the two that got
Speaker 1: dumped off weren't even fans of yours in the first place.
Speaker 2: The interesting thing is the one of the of the
Speaker 2: board members actually recused herself. She recognized that there could
Speaker 2: be an appearance of impropriety, even though she said I
Speaker 2: would be able to make this. She was a victim's
Speaker 2: advocate at the same time surrounding his case, so she
Speaker 2: had personal ties to the case. The other member was,
Speaker 2: I believe, the acting sheriff in the county where his
Speaker 2: trial was moved to.
Speaker 3: And so he's saying.
Speaker 2: Look, if he oversaw protecting the jurors and protecting people
Speaker 2: who were a part of the trial, that maybe he
Speaker 2: would have an unfair view of this man and what
Speaker 2: he did because he was connected to the case on
Speaker 2: a level where he was dealing with jurors and potentially victims, etc.
Speaker 1: Look, when we've said plenty of times here, if this
Speaker 1: is a matter of killing someone, why not take your
Speaker 1: time in the final days and weeks to get it right.
Speaker 1: And so if they're getting it right, that's fine, But
Speaker 1: it is fascinating Robes to imagine that they are up
Speaker 1: against the clock in Georgia. If we want to kill
Speaker 1: this guy, we need to do it before everybody goes
Speaker 1: to sleep on Christmas Eve, like the death ways noon, right,
Speaker 1: and on Christmas Eve is when it expired. That's just
Speaker 1: so he is waiting to if he makes it to
Speaker 1: Christmas Eve at noon, he'll survive to the need. That
Speaker 1: is macab That is just Look, the crime is horrific.
Speaker 1: This is not what we're doing, but we are. This
Speaker 1: is state sanctioned killing that we're doing here, and so
Speaker 1: it just something about that just feels icky as hell.
Speaker 2: Yes, and look, he's I know this sounds crazy, but
Speaker 2: he's been on death row. I at least these crime,
Speaker 2: this crime happened twenty two years ago, compared to some
Speaker 2: of the time. We've seen plenty of inmates this year
Speaker 2: who ended up being executed on death row.
Speaker 3: We were talking three decades, even four decades.
Speaker 1: I remember thirty seven years on one. Do you remember one?
Speaker 2: Worse more, there was in forty something years I believe
Speaker 2: one of them this year. So yes, it was the
Speaker 2: one where the father of the child who was killed
Speaker 2: actually perished. Three judges perished, like everyone involved in the
Speaker 2: trial had died, and he was waiting. It was forty
Speaker 2: something years, so yes, twenty two years. What's another month
Speaker 2: or two to make sure that this is done correctly.
Speaker 1: Well, he was one you and I had planned we
Speaker 1: were going to do a preview of this execution. Look,
Speaker 1: because of a lot of the legal things that had
Speaker 1: come up, but also it is always a public fascination
Speaker 1: with the final meal, and it's bizarre to a certain degree,
Speaker 1: but it's also understandable. It's human nature to it's something
Speaker 1: we can't relate to. We don't know what that's like,
Speaker 1: and it's kind of related in, kind of steeped in
Speaker 1: religion as well. A last meal, a final supper kind
Speaker 1: of a thing, and some argue it's just something we
Speaker 1: use to make the public feel better about what we're
Speaker 1: about to do.
Speaker 2: I was just going to say it, does it relieve
Speaker 2: some guilt that we give these the worst of the worst,
Speaker 2: these notorious killers, who've been convicted of the most heinous crimes,
Speaker 2: that somehow we give them one last little bit of
Speaker 2: pleasure before we kill them, That somehow that makes us
Speaker 2: feel better about what we're doing. I don't know, but yeah,
Speaker 2: we were going to do an entire podcast on last
Speaker 2: meals because this particular inmate, Stacy Humphries, was making headlines
Speaker 2: for what he was requesting and what it seemed as
Speaker 2: though the Department of Corrections in Georgia was going to
Speaker 2: give him.
Speaker 1: Have you seen one more a bigger one, or more
Speaker 1: fascinating one than this one? We've seen a lot over
Speaker 1: the years, not just this year, but I can't remember
Speaker 1: one quite like that.
Speaker 2: This was the most jaw dropping last meal request I
Speaker 2: have seen, and.
Speaker 3: One that it seemed as though the date was going
Speaker 3: to honor just because of its size. It was. I
Speaker 3: guess gludness is how a lot of people would have
Speaker 3: put it.
Speaker 2: And OBEs, yes, described he's a large man six two
Speaker 2: three hundred pounds or so, so but his even still
Speaker 2: his last meal request was a lot. So here's what
Speaker 2: actually Georgia put out as his last meal. Barbecue, beef brisket,
Speaker 2: pork ribs, bacon, double cheese, burger, french fries, coleslaw, cornbread,
Speaker 2: buffalo wings, meat lover's pan, pizza, vanilla ice cream, and
Speaker 2: two lemon lime sodas.
Speaker 3: Have you ever seen anything like that?
Speaker 1: Oh? H and haven't seen anyone? I mean, good for him,
Speaker 1: he's not going out with the steak tartar, I mean,
Speaker 1: why the hell? I mean, go crazy And that last
Speaker 1: moment's almost like he's trying to eat himself to death
Speaker 1: before the execution. But that's incredible. If they are, they
Speaker 1: put it out there. Maybe they will, and some will argue,
Speaker 1: why are we given anybody any comfort in the last
Speaker 1: second given what they have done? I don't know. Maybe
Speaker 1: because we're supposed to be better than they are. Maybe
Speaker 1: because we're supposed to be a little decent, a little human.
Speaker 1: I don't know what Georgia's rules are, but rules I
Speaker 1: didn't realize stay vary on how much they will let
Speaker 1: them get away with, but generally it seems like they
Speaker 1: like to make these requests happen. I don't know Georgia's
Speaker 1: limit on the cost. Florida has a forty dollars one.
Speaker 1: I think a couple other states have a fifteen or
Speaker 1: twenty five dollars one, but I don't know if it's unlimited.
Speaker 2: I think we need to do a podcast on this, because,
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know why. It's fascinating, but it
Speaker 2: is to see what we're willing to spend, what length
Speaker 2: we're willing to go to do we order out from restaurants?
Speaker 2: Does it have to be made within a prison kitchen?
Speaker 2: As you point out, different states have different rules, and
Speaker 2: this one is exceptional.
Speaker 1: And of course in the middle of this, Texas obviously
Speaker 1: on last meals, they have by far executed more people
Speaker 1: than any other state since the death penalty was reinstated
Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy six. They stopped this robes legislation. Some
Speaker 1: state centator got pissed because a death row inmate ordered
Speaker 1: some big, extravagant meal and didn't need it, so it
Speaker 1: was a waste. Came back. They have passed legislation you
Speaker 1: do not get a last meal in Texas. I get that,
Speaker 1: though it's cafeteria food is the standard thing. Some people
Speaker 1: do will say that makes sense. Some people hear that
Speaker 1: I didn't know about this, like, oh.
Speaker 2: Well, look, if you're going to stand by your death
Speaker 2: penalty and stand by the executions of convicted killers, then
Speaker 2: I understand with that same reasoning in mind, why would
Speaker 2: you give them some sort of pleasure before you kill them?
Speaker 2: Did they afford that to their victims. I'm sure that's
Speaker 2: not the case, But I was going to ask, could
Speaker 2: any human being eat all of that food? First of all,
Speaker 2: I wouldn't even have an appetite if I were about
Speaker 2: to be executed.
Speaker 1: That's why they said the guy in Texas didn't eat.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because I get that when I'm stressed or upset
Speaker 2: or nervous or anxious, I cannot.
Speaker 1: Eat one more note there. Some states have gone to
Speaker 1: given the meal a day or two ahead of time,
Speaker 1: not on the day, because obviously they wouldn't have appetime.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that seems remarkable and yes, all of this food.
Speaker 2: I I could have been starved in the desert for
Speaker 2: two weeks and I couldn't finish half of that, So
Speaker 2: that seems excessive. And that's why I'm just curious why
Speaker 2: Georgia put that out there and said here's what he's
Speaker 2: asking for, and they didn't say they weren't going to
Speaker 2: give it to him. I just thought that was maybe
Speaker 2: they were testing to see what public reaction would be like.
Speaker 3: I don't know, but it was baffling.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, folks, stay with us here because as
Speaker 1: we wrap up this year, one of the primary resources,
Speaker 1: a great resource for all the information having to do
Speaker 1: with executions here in the United States. They have put
Speaker 1: out their annual report and it's pretty shocking to see
Speaker 1: how the numbers of executions have gone up so much,
Speaker 1: but the number of people supporting the death penalty has
Speaker 1: gone down. Stay here, all right, We continue here on
Speaker 1: Amy and TJ talking about the execution in Georgia that
Speaker 1: has now been postponed. As they're trying to I guess
Speaker 1: some eyes and cross some te's and make sure they're
Speaker 1: doing everything wrong a postponed clemency hearing they're in Georgia.
Speaker 1: We will wait to see what happens. We were just talking.
Speaker 1: I forgot about this roges. We're talking about last meal
Speaker 1: requests and this guy in Georgia had a buffet that
Speaker 1: he ordered. Part where we were talking where this history,
Speaker 1: where the ritual come from. It's based somewhere in nineteenth century,
Speaker 1: somewhere in Europe, where they would do this to people
Speaker 1: who were condemned because they thought they were appeasing their
Speaker 1: spirits and they wouldn't come back and haunt them.
Speaker 3: Essentially, you know what, that makes the most sense out
Speaker 3: of anything.
Speaker 2: Guilt, So like, either it's guilt we feel about what
Speaker 2: we're about to do to you, so let's just give
Speaker 2: you this meal, or hey, let me make sure I
Speaker 2: don't get cursed because or haunted later because I just
Speaker 2: killed you for me.
Speaker 3: That makes way more sense.
Speaker 2: It's about, yes, the person trying to feel better about
Speaker 2: what they're about to do, including the entire state.
Speaker 1: Yes, right, we did mention. It's supposed to be forty
Speaker 1: eight scheduled death penalty executions this year. Tomorrow would have
Speaker 1: been forty seven. With the guy in Georgia, that one's postponed,
Speaker 1: so now the next one would be Thursday, Florida, No kidding,
Speaker 1: would be doing the last one of the year. If
Speaker 1: that one goes through, so we would end up with
Speaker 1: that would be the forty seventh then, but Robes for
Speaker 1: Florida makes sense that they've had their record year, they're
Speaker 1: going to wrap it up for the country and they'll
Speaker 1: be the last execution of the year, blowing away their
Speaker 1: previous record.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is And by the way, Florida, you have
Speaker 2: this stat in here with nineteen executions this year. Again,
Speaker 2: if Thursday's execution takes place, that's forty percent of the
Speaker 2: national total this year.
Speaker 3: That is remarkable.
Speaker 2: And by the way, it looks as though this Thursday
Speaker 2: execution is going to go forward. With Frank Wallace, he's
Speaker 2: fifty eight years old. The Florida Supreme Court just refused
Speaker 2: his last appeal for his execution to be stayed.
Speaker 3: But he did have a couple good points.
Speaker 2: He was nineteen at the time of the murders, and
Speaker 2: his lawyers have argued that he's intellectually disabled. He's one
Speaker 2: of those ones, whereas IQ is seventy two, seventy four,
Speaker 2: and we know right now the Supreme Court had ruled
Speaker 2: seventy was where you can be considered intellectually disabled enough
Speaker 2: to not be eligible for execution, So he's right on
Speaker 2: the margins there. But so far it looks as though
Speaker 2: that execution is going to go forward.
Speaker 1: And I will pick up on that point you just
Speaker 1: made as we want to share some some info, some
Speaker 1: headlines from the annual report from the Death Penalty Information
Speaker 1: Center if you don't know them, if you want to
Speaker 1: know anything about executions in this country. Again, it's called
Speaker 1: Death Penalty Information Center, and it is incredible source of
Speaker 1: information that just a database of upcoming executions, past executions,
Speaker 1: every state, all the history, even all of the inmates.
Speaker 1: It really is a good resource. But they put out
Speaker 1: their annual report robes and I'll start. We'll what you
Speaker 1: were just saying about the Supreme Court didn't realize they
Speaker 1: did not stay a single execution this year.
Speaker 2: A conservative leaning Supreme Court. I guess that shouldn't be shocking,
Speaker 2: not one.
Speaker 1: I don't know what the history was previous years, but
Speaker 1: you got forty eight. They didn't listen to one of them,
Speaker 1: and didn't we have several where we heard dissenting voices.
Speaker 1: We're on the Supreme Court. We're trying to step in.
Speaker 2: Yes, correct, the liberal leaning justices. A couple of Times
Speaker 2: wrote some scathing descents basically to say that they disagreed
Speaker 2: with going forward with the execution and the two that
Speaker 2: we did see stay. Those executions that we covered were
Speaker 2: governors intervening, the state intervening, certainly not the Supreme Court
Speaker 2: of the United States.
Speaker 1: That was one of the headlines from their annual report. Also,
Speaker 1: just the note here, twenty five executions last year we
Speaker 1: already mentioned, forty eight were expected here in this year.
Speaker 1: That's a huge jump. And here is the thing, where
Speaker 1: are we on public support for the death penalty. They're
Speaker 1: telling us now that support for the death penalties at
Speaker 1: fifty two percent. Those who now in this country say
Speaker 1: they are opposed are at forty four percent in robes.
Speaker 1: They say that's the highest number we have seen in
Speaker 1: some fifty years in the country.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 2: And do they give a reason behind it? Just maybe
Speaker 2: there's more public information all over.
Speaker 1: Time, sentiment over time, people younger people are more against it. Also,
Speaker 1: you get more and more of these high profile cases.
Speaker 1: It goes everywhere on social media. Somebody gets off death row,
Speaker 1: they're innocent. Those things stick.
Speaker 3: Look, and I think that that is a huge part
Speaker 3: of it.
Speaker 2: People want to generally support the idea, but when they
Speaker 2: start hearing the details, when they start looking into the cases.
Speaker 2: With the availability of media and information on these murderers
Speaker 2: from our state to state, you really can get into
Speaker 2: these stories and really start questioning whether or not they
Speaker 2: deserve to die, whether or not they're actually guilty of
Speaker 2: the crimes. When people start looking at cases and seeing
Speaker 2: how our justice system operates, they see the unfairness of
Speaker 2: it in a lot of cases.
Speaker 3: So that's very telling.
Speaker 1: And this report said that maybe juries are starting to
Speaker 1: pick up on that. They say we saw a decline
Speaker 1: this year. Now only twenty two death sentences in the country.
Speaker 1: I say only, but that is a decline. Also, they
Speaker 1: say fifty six percent of juries that had the choice
Speaker 1: of choosing life or the death penalty chose life. So
Speaker 1: the majority of the cases that means in which a
Speaker 1: jury had to decide the death penalty, the majority of
Speaker 1: them chose to give life. In the last one here
Speaker 1: I mentioned to you before we came on that just disturbing, chilling,
Speaker 1: just kind of said, damn. The number of military vets executed.
Speaker 2: The ten military veterans executed this year, I remembered as
Speaker 2: some of the cases we covered, looking to see that
Speaker 2: they were military trained, that they had fought in wars.
Speaker 2: Many of them obviously came back from those wars suffering,
Speaker 2: and that has been a huge cry from so many
Speaker 2: folks who say, hey, we do not take care of
Speaker 2: our vets mentally. We don't consider what they've been through,
Speaker 2: we don't consider what they've lost in defending our country,
Speaker 2: in serving our country, and we don't take care of
Speaker 2: their mental needs when they come back.
Speaker 1: There was a high historical number. I can't remember the
Speaker 1: I can't put it in the right context, but this
Speaker 1: was a high number historically based on previous years. And
Speaker 1: that is that's that's that's a disproportionate representation of death
Speaker 1: row inmates, ten out of the forty eight.
Speaker 2: That's so terrible with math, But what is that percentage?
Speaker 1: It's right, that's twenty percent. That's incredibly somebody needs to
Speaker 1: look into that. I hope they are working on studying that.
Speaker 1: That is disturbing to think, but that's a disproportionate number. Folks,
Speaker 1: We look, we always appreciate you. This was something I
Speaker 1: guess Robes we didn't intend to at the beginning of
Speaker 1: the year, but we kind of fell into as more
Speaker 1: and more cases came up, and more and more executions
Speaker 1: were planned, and more and more, frankly, questions came up
Speaker 1: about a lot of them. This is something we kind
Speaker 1: of been diving into this year and followed a bunch
Speaker 1: of a bunch of executions, and crazy as it sounds,
Speaker 1: there was some relief the young man that these sentence
Speaker 1: was commuted to life. It seemed like the right thing.
Speaker 1: You remember the one who his brother was on Yes, yes, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: for that crime. It's not like we're rooting for one
Speaker 1: way or another kind of a thing. And there are
Speaker 1: victims involved in all these but man, when it comes
Speaker 1: to killing somebody state sanctioned and we're supposed all be
Speaker 1: on board with this thing, it just we got to
Speaker 1: get it right. We have to be one hundred percent correct.
Speaker 2: And we've said this in both of the cases where
Speaker 2: the executions were stayed. Both of the victims families were
Speaker 2: very much in favor of the person convicted of killing
Speaker 2: their loved one to not die, that there was value
Speaker 2: in their life, that there was value in them being
Speaker 2: able to either be a cautionary tale for others or
Speaker 2: at least helping other inmates who are going to go
Speaker 2: off and live better lives, that there was value in
Speaker 2: them living versus seeing them die. And so we've said
Speaker 2: that seems to be something that should be considered in
Speaker 2: every case. Let the victim's family have a say in
Speaker 2: what happens.
Speaker 1: What was the sad one now I can't remember. I
Speaker 1: think it was Florida where the guy was desperate to meet.
Speaker 3: He murdered his mother.
Speaker 2: Yeah, gas station robbery, and he ended up through letters
Speaker 2: because he wasn't allowed to meet him. For all the
Speaker 2: reasons why they keep safety protocols in place where victim's
Speaker 2: family members cannot meet someone on death row who's convicted
Speaker 2: of killing their loved one. That makes sense. But he
Speaker 2: actually developed a relationship with this man, this inmate before
Speaker 2: he died and was begging the governor not or at
Speaker 2: least to stay his execution. But it didn't happen. That
Speaker 2: was one of the sadder stories that we told. But
Speaker 2: certainly I do believe, and I know you do too,
Speaker 2: that this is something that our country has legalized, This
Speaker 2: is still something that the majority of American support. We
Speaker 2: should be able to talk about these stories. Should it should?
Speaker 2: You should know how it happens. You should know what happens.
Speaker 2: You should know who we're killing and why we're killing them.
Speaker 2: It's all a part of at least bolstering what you
Speaker 2: already believe or questioning what you think you know. Those
Speaker 2: are both very important things to do.
Speaker 1: All right, folks, who will continue to keep an eye
Speaker 1: on and update you about what happens in Florida on
Speaker 1: Thursday as well, and again as a reminder, top right
Speaker 1: corner of your Apple podcast app on our show page,
Speaker 1: that button says follow click that you can subscribe and
Speaker 1: then get our updates. And there are a plenty, it
Speaker 1: seems these days, But for right now on behalf of
Speaker 1: your robo Kim TJ. Holmes talk to you all sooner