The SCOTUS has denied Brandon Bernard’s petition and this unjust execution will move forward now. Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan would have granted a stay. Justice Sotomayor published a six-page dissent that lays out many of the legal reasons why this execution is wrong.
Justice Sotomayor details serious misconduct committed by federal prosecutors in Brandon Bernard’s case. Prosecutors knowingly presented false testimony and covered up evidence.
Prosecutors claimed at trial that Brandon Bernard was a ringleader in a gang. Before Brandon’s trial, a police officer investigator gave the prosecutors a pyramid chart showing that Brandon was actually at the bottom of any gang hierarchy. Prosecutors covered up that evidence.
The Fifth Circuit refused to even consider Brandon’s appeal regarding this serious misconduct. The judges claimed that death-sentenced prisoners only get one chance to challenge their sentence unless new evidence is discovered.
As Justice Sotomayor bluntly put it, “the Fifth Circuit got it wrong.” The rule concocted by the judges goes against Supreme Court precedent and rewards rogue prosecutors. How can a person challenge their sentence based on withheld evidence that remains hidden?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sister Helen Prejean

Sister Helen Prejean Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @helenprejean

12 Dec
The SCOTUS voted to allow the federal government to execute Alfred Bourgeois despite the fact that he is intellectually disabled with an IQ measured between 70-75. Justice Sotomayor published a dissent joined by Justice Kagan.
The Federal Death Penalty Act clearly forbids the execution of a person who is “mentally retarded” (language from the statute). A federal district court found that Bourgeois had made a “strong showing” of intellectual disability but that was reversed by the 7th Circuit.
The 7th Circuit said that another court had found no intellectual disability in 2011. But that court relied on discredited observations and assumptions about people with intellectual disabilities in reaching its decision.
Read 8 tweets
10 Nov
I know many people are concerned about the damage Pres. Trump might do during his last two months in office. I’m focused on trying to save the lives of Orlando Hall, Lisa Montgomery, and Brandon Bernard. All three of them have federal execution dates in the coming weeks.
These three human beings are facing execution when, in just two months time, the new president would be sure to stop these federal killings. Just take Lisa Montgomery as an example.
Lisa Montgomery was dealt a losing hand from before her birth and now Trump is trying to trump that terrible hand with an execution in these last days of his presidency.
Read 20 tweets
2 Nov
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion this morning that reversed the 5th Circuit’s finding that Texas prison guards were immune from suit for torturing an incarcerated man by forcing him to sleep on a floor covered in sewage. Trent Taylor can now proceed with his lawsuit.
In September 2013, Texas prison guards placed Trent Taylor in a cell that was covered, ceiling to floor, in “massive amounts of feces.” Taylor did not eat or drink for nearly four days, fearing that his food would be contaminated in the filthy cell.
Prison guards then moved Taylor into a freezing cold cell that did not have a toilet. There was only a clogged drain in the floor. Taylor held his bladder for over 24 hours but eventually involuntarily relieved himself. Raw sewage backed up from the drain and covered the floor.
Read 9 tweets
5 Oct
The U.S. Supreme Court began a new term this morning. The Court declined to hear a case involving serious questions about prosecutorial conduct. Justice Sotomayor issued a statement reaffirming that prosecutors should be more interested in achieving justice than winning cases.
The case in question was Kaur v. Maryland. Raminder Kaur raised a question of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal. The trial court ordered her attorneys to turn over everything in their files, including privileged conversations between Ms. Kaur and the attorneys.
As a result, prosecutors were able to read almost everything that Ms. Kaur had said to her attorneys in confidence as well as defense investigation reports and the defense attorneys' trial strategy plans.
Read 11 tweets
5 Oct
In his new encyclical letter Fratelli Tutti, @Pontifex writes that the death penalty is a "false answer" that "does not resolve the problems [it is] meant to solve" and introduces "new elements of destruction in the fabric of national and global society."
Pope Francis writes that "there can be no stepping back" from the Catholic Church's now-unequivocal stand against the death penalty. "Today we state clearly that 'the death penalty is inadmissible' and the Church is firmly committed to calling for its abolition worldwide."
Pope Francis also makes the keen observation that "fear and resentment can easily lead to viewing punishment in a vindictive and even cruel way, rather than as part of a process of healing and reintegration into society."
Read 6 tweets
1 Oct
Gov. @GavinNewsom signed several important racial justice bills into law today. These new laws are important steps toward improving the fairness of California’s justice system and beginning to right some wrongs done under racially biased laws of the past. @CAgovernor
Last year, Gov. Newsom restored the right of formerly incarcerated people to participate in the legal process as jurors. Today, Gov. Newsom expanded the source lists used to form pools of potential jurors - now those with California IDs, registered voters, and state taxpayers.
Jury service is the community’s means of exercising a check on prosecutorial discretion and overreach. A jury’s verdict is only fair when the pool of potential jurors accurately reflects the broader community. This new law will help make that true in California.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!