In the absence of a stay, she will be executed for killing her daughter. Her story is that her daughter fell down a flight of stairs but did not seem to be in great distress. Two days later she died. Assuming that Ms. Lucio is telling the truth, she sounds neglectful. On the other hand the way she was questioned is an excellent example how an interrogation should not be conducted. The Texas Tribune wrote, "The case against Lucio was built almost entirely around an ambiguous “confession” obtained after hours of police interrogation, and the judge at her trial barred expert testimony that might have explained why she would admit to police things she didn’t do." One is somewhat reminded of the Martin Tankleff case, which involved a false confession. The questions surrounding the injuries suffered by the infant are well outside my knowledge but are almost certainly worth discussing in the context of this case.
In the second half of the article in the Texas Tribune is the following: "Three of the 10 denying judges, though, were still concerned with the trial judge’s decision. But they believed their hands were tied by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, a controversial 1996 federal law passed in a tough-on-crime era that limits both the allowable number of death penalty appeals as well as their paths to success." AEDPA is an absolute disaster of a law.
In the second half of the article in the Texas Tribune is the following: "Three of the 10 denying judges, though, were still concerned with the trial judge’s decision. But they believed their hands were tied by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, a controversial 1996 federal law passed in a tough-on-crime era that limits both the allowable number of death penalty appeals as well as their paths to success." AEDPA is an absolute disaster of a law.
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/OVXiprt
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire