Speaker 1: Folks, the state of Tennessee has not executed a woman
Speaker 1: in some two hundred years, and Krista Gail Pike is
Speaker 1: fighting to not be the next. And with that, welcome
Speaker 1: to this episode of Amy and TJ. Presentz wrote, this
Speaker 1: is a story that got a lot of headlines of
Speaker 1: the end of last year because there was a date
Speaker 1: put on the books for an execution, a rare execution
Speaker 1: of a woman in Tennessee.
Speaker 2: That's right, she was set, I say, is said, there's
Speaker 2: not Auz is said to be executed on September thirtieth
Speaker 2: of this year. But Krista Pike has now filed a
Speaker 2: lawsuit to stop her execution. She says that executing her
Speaker 2: would violate her constitutional rights and her religious beliefs. Will
Speaker 2: get into exactly how she's saying an execution would do
Speaker 2: both of those things to her. It's interesting, It's creative.
Speaker 1: It's creative, you just said, because my next question to you,
Speaker 1: we we just we happen to cover a lot of
Speaker 1: executions in rooms. We see this thing fighting, fighting, fighting
Speaker 1: to stay alive.
Speaker 2: Yes, attorneys will come up with all sorts of different
Speaker 2: reasons as to why their client shouldn't die, whether it
Speaker 2: they go back to the trial and find some reason
Speaker 2: why they didn't get a fair shake, or they'll go
Speaker 2: and try and find reasons why their client is not
Speaker 2: mentally stable enough to face an execution. But this woman's
Speaker 2: attorneys are claiming she has a condition and she has
Speaker 2: a religious belief that would preclude her from being executed.
Speaker 1: Look, we've come up, and we say we've come up.
Speaker 1: They a lot of attorneys have come up with all
Speaker 1: kinds of ideas for how to save their client. We
Speaker 1: don't see necessarily robes it work that often, but sometimes
Speaker 1: it delays the process or they go through the process.
Speaker 1: This is and it shouldes.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Do people feel any differently in the country when we
Speaker 1: talk about execution and people have their opinions about whether
Speaker 1: we should have it or should not have it, But
Speaker 1: do we feel any differently when it comes to executing
Speaker 1: a woman.
Speaker 2: Absolutely we do. Yes, there is something about even sending
Speaker 2: a woman to prison for the rest of their lives.
Speaker 2: We just heard a jury this is so interesting. A juror,
Speaker 2: i should say, speak out after the last trial of
Speaker 2: Corey Ritchins and she said, we sat there in that
Speaker 2: jury room and we all came into it thinking she
Speaker 2: was guilty, but we all started talking about how possibly
Speaker 2: she might not be because the idea of sending a
Speaker 2: mother to prison for the rest of her life, the
Speaker 2: idea of taking a mother away from her children for
Speaker 2: the rest of their lives, was very It was very
Speaker 2: present in the room when they were trying to come
Speaker 2: to the conclusion. So, yes, I do think we have
Speaker 2: an aversion as a country, as a society in punishing
Speaker 2: women for crimes because we think of them as mothers,
Speaker 2: We think of them as people who others count on,
Speaker 2: and we try not we try to. We wish for
Speaker 2: the best, we hope for the best. We don't want
Speaker 2: it to be true.
Speaker 3: And we don't want them to be monstrous exactly. We
Speaker 3: it just doesn't work.
Speaker 1: These are ok not to label women, but yes, we
Speaker 1: don't see we see them as nurturers. Like you said,
Speaker 1: So when stories and we have seen plenty of robes
Speaker 1: of mothers in the country, famous stories of mothers killing
Speaker 1: their children, they're shocking.
Speaker 3: We can't we just can't it. It doesn't make sense.
Speaker 3: So here we are. I don't know. It's an interesting
Speaker 3: thing to consider.
Speaker 1: Okay, there are possibly people out there who are Yes,
Speaker 1: I'm for the death penalty, but only as applies to men, right,
Speaker 1: is that really?
Speaker 3: Do we really feel that differently about it?
Speaker 1: And if there was a question about execution and it
Speaker 1: just had to do with women, would we be still
Speaker 1: in favor of it the way we are as a country.
Speaker 1: The numbers go back and forth the people who are
Speaker 1: in favor of the death penalty. But I'm just thinking
Speaker 1: about that because we don't do it often. Since nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy six, only eighteen women have been executed in this country.
Speaker 1: That's one percent of the however many that have been
Speaker 1: executed in that time. Yeah, I mean that doesn't happen
Speaker 1: at all. No, it doesn't happen very often.
Speaker 2: And look, I think it's because also women are not
Speaker 2: as likely to be murderers as men just period in general,
Speaker 2: statistically speaking. So yes, of course you're gonna have fewer
Speaker 2: women sentenced to death, but yes, we do.
Speaker 1: Numbers there though, I have to do with the discrepancy
Speaker 1: of how many who end up on trial for murder,
Speaker 1: how many of them, the percentage of them who don't
Speaker 1: get the death penalty that if they were a man
Speaker 1: they might.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, no, that makes sense, that does make sense.
Speaker 2: That does make sense, So yes, I do think that would.
Speaker 3: You be less likely to vote death penalty for women?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I wouldn't be able to be on a jury.
Speaker 2: Full disclosure here, because I am against the death penalty.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't be able to send anybody to death row.
Speaker 3: No matter who they are.
Speaker 2: Correct. That's just where I am personally, So I would
Speaker 2: have to make that known the moment I was being
Speaker 2: questioned as a juror and they'd say thank you and next,
Speaker 2: because I just I wouldn't be able.
Speaker 3: To sleep the defense Yeah we want her.
Speaker 2: No, So I am somebody who who would not be
Speaker 2: able to be on that jury. I couldn't sleep at
Speaker 2: night either way. How about you?
Speaker 1: I yeah, we've talked about it. Plaint just not a
Speaker 1: fan of this ceremony, if you will. For us, going
Speaker 1: through the process of killing somebody just feels barbaric, no
Speaker 1: matter what that crime happens to be, and there's been
Speaker 1: some horrific, horrific crimes the way I would say, if
Speaker 1: that family member went and killed that person and I
Speaker 1: was on the jury, I would do a whole agreed
Speaker 1: with it a time to kill a thing.
Speaker 2: Where I absolutely I agree with that sentiment, and by
Speaker 2: the way would have zero problems sending someone to prison
Speaker 2: for the rest of their lives to never see the
Speaker 2: life day again, no problem there just couldn't vote to executing.
Speaker 1: No, I'm just curious that as we were talking about
Speaker 1: if it's different with a man or woman, know it's
Speaker 1: no different for us necessarily, but only eighteen women. So
Speaker 1: ro yes, this will make headlines, Krista gail'pike. How will
Speaker 1: the country feel? Will there be a different conversation leading
Speaker 1: up to this execution about the death penalty? And there
Speaker 1: are some actually robe there are she has as a
Speaker 1: part of her story in her case, if you not
Speaker 1: the crime, but her life leading up to the crime
Speaker 1: to where you would go, wow, you would have at
Speaker 1: you gotta take a beat to go man, this person
Speaker 1: had it bad.
Speaker 2: It's true, and look, there are some First of all,
Speaker 2: we want to point out this is not an issue
Speaker 2: or not a case of guilt or innocence. She absolutely
Speaker 2: admits to having done this now and as actually we're
Speaker 2: going to get into we are going to hear directly
Speaker 2: from her, have a couple quotes from her that are
Speaker 2: very powerful actually about where she is now in her
Speaker 2: process of attrition and culpability it is. It's some to
Speaker 2: consider when you're hearing this case. But her crime is heinous.
Speaker 2: This happened thirty years ago, actually more than thirty years ago,
Speaker 2: January twelfth, nineteen ninety five. But here's the deal. She
Speaker 2: was just eighteen years old. I say just eighteen years old,
Speaker 2: But when you hear what she did, it's tough to reconcile.
Speaker 2: She tortured before she murdered a nineteen year old girl.
Speaker 2: Her name was Colleen Slemmer, her romantic rival, or someone
Speaker 2: she considered to be her romantic rival. She thought this
Speaker 2: girl had her sights on her boyfriend, so she convinces
Speaker 2: her boyfriend who's seventeen years old, and a friend to
Speaker 2: lure this young woman, this Colleen Slimmer into the woods.
Speaker 2: And when they get her into the woods, she apparently
Speaker 2: and even bragged about this later that she cuts Slummer's
Speaker 2: throat six times with a box cutter, cut her back
Speaker 2: with a meat cleaver, carved a pentagram into her chest,
Speaker 2: and then continued even as Slummer was begging her to
Speaker 2: please please stop, and eventually she killed her by throwing
Speaker 2: a large chunk of asphalt at her head, which they
Speaker 2: believe was the fatal blow. And then get this, she
Speaker 2: has a part of her skull that she takes with
Speaker 2: her as almost a trophy and shows to folks.
Speaker 1: A lot of people would hear those details and say, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: this woman doesn't deserve to live. And that's understandable, that's heinus.
Speaker 1: There is no question there at all. Robes, but some
Speaker 1: of the and you've looked into and got into she
Speaker 1: had a very tough and some of her attorneys and
Speaker 1: others who are advocating for her to not be on
Speaker 1: death row, she had a history robes of just a
Speaker 1: horrific upbringing, mental illness, She had problems. Young lady had problems.
Speaker 1: Now this is not excuse she made the choices she made,
Speaker 1: but this is part of the argument that some are
Speaker 1: putting out. This is before she's making her legal arguments,
Speaker 1: but just from a sympathetic standpoint. And eighteen, we don't
Speaker 1: that often sentence people to death who are eighteen, nineteen,
Speaker 1: twenty years old.
Speaker 2: Yes, in fact, that exact range of age. I was surprised,
Speaker 2: just looked it up. The state of Tennessee in modern
Speaker 2: history has not executed one person, male or female, who
Speaker 2: committed their crime at the age of eighteen, nineteen or twenty.
Speaker 2: So that is significant, maybe even more so than the
Speaker 2: fact that they haven't executed a woman in two hundred years.
Speaker 2: They haven't executed anybody who committed a crime that young.
Speaker 3: That's interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean you think about eighteen year old, yes, think
Speaker 1: about we got a thirteen year old and a nineteen
Speaker 1: year old in the house essentially, and.
Speaker 4: They're babies, children, they are absolute children. Dus you're a
Speaker 4: nineteen year old at least is a child. Oh no,
Speaker 4: she's a No, she is a child.
Speaker 2: And look when you think about a child who has
Speaker 2: been abused, neglected, sexually, physically, all of that four years
Speaker 2: and you have a mental illness on top of it,
Speaker 2: and you're eighteen and I think she had just turned eighteen.
Speaker 2: Her boyfriend was seventeen. So these were kids, and again
Speaker 2: does not excuse the viciousness of the crime. But you'll
Speaker 2: hear from her and where she is now, because when
Speaker 2: you're that young, it's not that you're not responsible. But
Speaker 2: shouldn't that be taken into consideration when you were deciding
Speaker 2: between life and death?
Speaker 1: Well, I guess the jury did at the time. Right,
Speaker 1: this is what our system allows, and this is what
Speaker 1: justice looks like and these are the rules in that
Speaker 1: regard Robes.
Speaker 3: I mean, have we.
Speaker 1: Learned more since she was convicted? Have we done more research?
Speaker 1: Have we become frankly a little more averse to the
Speaker 1: death penalty? Have we become you know?
Speaker 2: So that that is part of her attorney's argument. Are
Speaker 2: in this lawsuit among the things, they say, you literally
Speaker 2: nailed it. You nailed it. Her attorneys are arguing that
Speaker 2: if she were tried today, she would not have been
Speaker 2: sentenced to death because of her age, her mental illness
Speaker 2: at the time of the murder, and her history of
Speaker 2: sexual abuse as a young child. Period a jury would
Speaker 2: not have convicted her to death. That she would have
Speaker 2: been convicted, but not to death. And in terms of
Speaker 2: her lawsuit, her her attorneys are saying lethal injection method
Speaker 2: violates her religious beliefs and her constitutional right because she
Speaker 2: says her execution could cause her unnecessary pain and added
Speaker 2: terror and suffering, which is a violation of the Constitution
Speaker 2: which protects everyone against cruel and unusual punishment. They claim
Speaker 2: she has a condition, okay, it's called thrombocytosis, and it
Speaker 2: can lead to unusual bleeding, and they say death by
Speaker 2: drowning in one's own blood. So because of this condition
Speaker 2: and the lethal injection, they.
Speaker 1: Could, yes, be problematic. Yes, do they know for sure?
Speaker 1: I mean, do they know she's going to suffer?
Speaker 2: They say could? That is the word they used. And
Speaker 2: then they also said okay, so and that's specific to
Speaker 2: lethal injection. Then they're saying she can't request the only
Speaker 2: other approved method of dying because in the state of Tennessee,
Speaker 2: because it would violate her Buddhist beliefs. Because her Buddhist
Speaker 2: beliefs teach her that she is not allowed to participate
Speaker 2: in any process that would lead to her own death.
Speaker 2: So she can't choose the method of execution because that
Speaker 2: would violate her Buddhist beliefs. And by the way, the
Speaker 2: only other method is electrocution. But she can't even make
Speaker 2: that pivot, she claims, because it would violate her religious beliefs.
Speaker 2: That is the foundation of their lawsuit.
Speaker 1: Okay, so they have two basis for it, right, Yes, Okay,
Speaker 1: So her medical condition and her religious beliefs should not
Speaker 1: allow this to go forward.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 1: I don't know what chance she has here, but like
Speaker 1: we say, she is actually doing this a lot, a
Speaker 1: lot farther out from her execution than a lot of
Speaker 1: inmates to do.
Speaker 3: That's true, that's our scrambling last second.
Speaker 2: So yes, that is a very good point. They are
Speaker 2: laying the foundation now because if this doesn't work, I'm
Speaker 2: sure they'll try something else and then something else. But
Speaker 2: this Eight's response, which they just put into evidence here,
Speaker 2: they say, yeah, they have not shown in any way
Speaker 2: that lethal injection would present an unconstitutional risk to her.
Speaker 2: And then they said the Eighth Amendment does not guarantee
Speaker 2: a prisoner a painless death, and that some risk of
Speaker 2: pain is inherent in any method of execution, no matter
Speaker 2: how humane. And they added, for a little fun, we
Speaker 2: wish Pike's commitment to the sanctity of life had arrived
Speaker 2: in time to save Colleen Slemmer. That shows you where
Speaker 2: they stand on her lawsuit.
Speaker 1: How did you notice, like legal briefings and stuff are
Speaker 1: getting snarkier.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's a really good point. Yes, so yes, the
Speaker 2: state added a little snarky comment at the end. And
Speaker 2: we should point out because we always talk about what
Speaker 2: the victim's family wants. Colleen Slemmer's mom desperately wants Pike
Speaker 2: to die, like wants her to die I'm going to
Speaker 2: give you the quote that she gave.
Speaker 3: And the mom at this point has to be how
Speaker 3: old this was? So long?
Speaker 2: This was thirty years ago?
Speaker 1: Oh my goodness, I mean maybe sixty seventies at least.
Speaker 2: Yes, at least she said. There is not a day
Speaker 2: that goes by that I don't think about Colleen or
Speaker 2: how she died and how rough it was. I just
Speaker 2: want Krista down so I can end it, relieve my daughter,
Speaker 2: so she finally can be resting. There is no question
Speaker 2: Colleen Slummer's mom wants Krista to die, and that last week.
Speaker 2: I mean, it doesn't matter legally necessarily, but I do
Speaker 2: think it matters just to know that that is the
Speaker 2: wish of the victim.
Speaker 3: You know it mattered that family.
Speaker 1: I know you said legally it might not have some bearing,
Speaker 1: but it'll have a bearing if it came down to
Speaker 1: the governor deciding to sign or not sign a ford
Speaker 1: or commute or whatever the sentence.
Speaker 2: Might be, you make a very good chance.
Speaker 3: I was letting her view be known.
Speaker 1: And we have have we not seen some governors taken
Speaker 1: to consideration here in the past year, Yes, and actually
Speaker 1: go with the families witches So that's pretty powerful.
Speaker 2: Also powerful. When we come back, we're going to tell
Speaker 2: you what Krista Pike has had to say now about
Speaker 2: her crime. It's a very very I even given all
Speaker 2: the horrific details of what this woman is convicted of
Speaker 2: and has admitted to, hearing where she is now might
Speaker 2: soften your stance on what you think should happen to her.
Speaker 3: Come September and.
Speaker 2: Welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ Presents, where we
Speaker 2: are talking about the execution of Christa Gail Pike. She
Speaker 2: is fifty years old. She is set to be executed
Speaker 2: September thirtieth for a crime she committed thirty years ago,
Speaker 2: a vicious killing of a romantic rival. She was eighteen
Speaker 2: at the time of the murder. Her victim was eighteen.
Speaker 2: And here is what Krista Pike has said one in
Speaker 2: a website that has been created by her supporter. She
Speaker 2: This was her statement that is posted on her website
Speaker 2: by folks who don't want to see her die. She says,
Speaker 2: there is no excuse for what I did. I take
Speaker 2: full responsibility for my actions and regret everything that happened
Speaker 2: that night. I only want my situation to be looked
Speaker 2: at now through the eyes of logic instead of anger
Speaker 2: and answer the question of if I deserve to die
Speaker 2: for a crime committed by three people. She says this
Speaker 2: because her boyfriend got life in prison and the other
Speaker 2: friend who was there testified and was given probation.
Speaker 1: The boyfriend, by the way, this just happened. He was
Speaker 1: eligible for parole last year. He ain't getting out. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's incredible to see she has an execution date set
Speaker 1: up at the same time the other guy was eligible
Speaker 1: to get the hell out of prison.
Speaker 2: Isn't that wild? That's she was the one who did.
Speaker 2: She was the vicious acts they stood by. He lured
Speaker 2: her And look, in a lot of states, that wouldn't matter.
Speaker 2: If you're a part of a crime and someone dies
Speaker 2: in the act of that crime, you are still on
Speaker 2: the hook for murder. But so that was that, not
Speaker 2: that emotional, not that powerful. But the letter she wrote
Speaker 2: to the Tennessee and is what moved me. She said,
Speaker 2: think back to the worst mistake you made as a
Speaker 2: reckless teenager, while mine happened to be huge, unforgettable and
Speaker 2: ruined countless lives. I was a mentally ill eighteen year
Speaker 2: old kid. It took me numerous years to even realize
Speaker 2: the gravity of what I'd done, and even more to
Speaker 2: accept how many lives I affected. I took the life
Speaker 2: of someone's child, sister, friend. It sickens me now to
Speaker 2: think that someone as loving and as compassionate as myself
Speaker 2: had the ability to commit such a crime.
Speaker 1: I hear you and you broke. I will listen to
Speaker 1: both sides who re that and say, you are full
Speaker 1: of it. You've had time, you did the crime, this
Speaker 1: was the punishment, and justice has to be carried out.
Speaker 1: I will listen to somebody else who said all of
Speaker 1: that is correct, and no matter if you think she's
Speaker 1: just doing this to save her butt or not, as
Speaker 1: a decent human and just some part pulls at your heartstring.
Speaker 1: To have some grace or some sympathy for even a
Speaker 1: person capable of pulling off as heinous of a crime.
Speaker 3: Is that Robes. It is very difficult. Two.
Speaker 1: I mean, Jesus did it. I guess right, So it
Speaker 1: was pretty difficult to do. But to be forgiving of
Speaker 1: someone in the face of the worst type of crime
Speaker 1: who it asks a lot of a human being Robes
Speaker 1: and certainly asks even more once you hear the statement
Speaker 1: of her mother of the victims.
Speaker 2: Stay yes, I mean yeah, you can never put yourself
Speaker 2: in her shoes, and I could never ever pass judgment
Speaker 2: on how she feels or what she wants in terms
Speaker 2: of justice for her daughter and for the pain, the
Speaker 2: life of pain that she has had to endure missing
Speaker 2: her daughter. I totally get that. I think it's interesting though,
Speaker 2: when we've seen, especially folks on death row actually have
Speaker 2: something of value to add. Maybe it's to other inmates,
Speaker 2: maybe it's to the lives of family members who are
Speaker 2: on the other side, who they can show as a
Speaker 2: cautionary tale, but at least offers some wisdom or some
Speaker 2: guidance to prevent other people from going down that path.
Speaker 2: That's the other side of it. Is there value? Is
Speaker 2: there something they can still contribute should they be given
Speaker 2: the opportunity of redemption and grace and to be able
Speaker 2: to rehabilitate who they are and what they believe and
Speaker 2: who they stood for what they stood for.
Speaker 3: You said redemption and grace. I guess for me and
Speaker 3: for a lot of people, that might be a higher bar.
Speaker 3: I'm just talking mercy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And that's not seem to be something we have
Speaker 1: a high tolerance for these days broke just mercy. You
Speaker 1: did what you did, but I am not going to
Speaker 1: be vengeful. I am not going to say you deserve
Speaker 1: the same. I am going to grant mercy. And I
Speaker 1: know it's not nothing to do with war and things
Speaker 1: we're seeing, but we have a mindset or an attitude
Speaker 1: or coming from the highest ranks in this country that
Speaker 1: get a lot of attention. No mercy like making a
Speaker 1: game or a joke out of killing people that we
Speaker 1: think are bad people.
Speaker 3: It's a game.
Speaker 1: The boats I can see the boats, all those hecks
Speaker 1: have kept posting those videos looking blowing these guys out
Speaker 1: of the water like it's fun, like it's a video game.
Speaker 1: And so we don't seem like a merciful country, quite frankly,
Speaker 1: asking for ropes. Can we extend that to anybody these days?
Speaker 2: Just mer It doesn't look like that's going to happen
Speaker 2: for Pike, and certainly the lawsuit will follow it. But
Speaker 2: the state's response seemed to swift and fairly sound actually
Speaker 2: in terms of what she is claiming and what they
Speaker 2: are stating. And of course we will follow any ruling
Speaker 2: that may come on this, but she's got some time.
Speaker 2: There'll be other appeals, most certainly before September thirtieth. And
Speaker 2: this is the state of Tennessee. Not sure what their
Speaker 2: track record is on granting clemency to folks, but it
Speaker 2: does happen. This is a pretty vicious crime. I think
Speaker 2: her age, the fact that she was eighteen, the fact
Speaker 2: that she was mentally ill and that has been diagnosed.
Speaker 2: Don't know if that would be of consideration by this governor,
Speaker 2: but she would be the nineteenth woman executed in modern
Speaker 2: US history. This is also interesting. I didn't realize this.
Speaker 2: There are forty eight female death row inmates in the
Speaker 2: US right now still awaiting getting that execution date. Just
Speaker 2: for comparison's sake, men, there are about twenty one hundred
Speaker 2: men on death row right now in this country and
Speaker 2: forty eight women on death row.
Speaker 3: It's a very low percentage. And you talk of the other.
Speaker 1: Women who have been who have gotten the death penalty
Speaker 1: for a crime the committed at eighteen, there are there
Speaker 1: have been.
Speaker 3: She's the fourth.
Speaker 1: One of them was exonerated, one of them was commuted,
Speaker 1: and the other one is in California where there's a
Speaker 1: moratory im one executions. So essentially, what you're talking about
Speaker 1: eighteen year old women who committed crimes. There's only one
Speaker 1: right now who is eligible to be killed in that
Speaker 1: group since nineteen seventy six. She's the only one. Wow,
Speaker 1: She's the only one. One got cleared, one got commuted,
Speaker 1: and one is in California. She's the only one right
Speaker 1: now who has been convicted as a woman at eighteen
Speaker 1: who's set to die.
Speaker 3: Wow, she's the only one.
Speaker 2: All right. Well, we will of course follow this case
Speaker 2: through again. Her execution date September thirtieth, twenty six and
Speaker 2: without everyone, We appreciate you listening to us. As always,
Speaker 2: I made me robock On behalf of TJ. Holmes. We
Speaker 2: will talk to you soon.