Oklahoma Lawmaker Calls for Investigation of Prosecutor for Deliberately Withholding Evidence of Innocence in Richard Glossip Retrial

An Oklahoma
state consultant has referred to as for an investigation into the practices of the Oklahoma County District Legal professional’s workplace following extra revelations that county prosecutors intentionally withheld exculpatory proof and manufactured false testimony to safe a conviction and dying sentence in opposition to Richard Glossip in his 2004 retrial.

At a information convention on September 22, 2022, the fourth date Oklahoma had set to execute Glossip, State Consultant Justin Humphrey (R–Lane, pictured) referred to as the prosecution’s conduct within the case “extraordinarily unethical.” “That is unacceptable,” Humphrey stated. “You’re taking a look at taking an individual’s life, which makes you no higher than a assassin. … I wish to name for an investigation.”

Humphrey, who describes himself as “a powerful proponent” of capital punishment, stated that he initially “was very reluctant” to turn into concerned in Glossip’s case. “Now I’m on the level we’re investigating the flawed folks,” Humphrey stated. “I don’t assume that we must always simply let this go. … That is unacceptable. … Why would you do this? Why would you manufacture proof?”

The information convention was held in reference to supplemental petition filed by Glossip’s legal professionals within the Oklahoma Courtroom of Felony Appeals presenting documentation that Oklahoma County prosecutors had withheld proof that Justin Sneed, their lead witness within the case, had needed to recant his testimony implicating Glossip within the 1997 homicide of motel proprietor Barry Van Treese, however that Sneed feared doing so would jeopardize a plea deal that had spared him the dying penalty for the homicide. The prosecution information, which protection counsel have been capable of view for the primary time on September 1, 2022, contained notes relating to a collection of conferences between trial prosecutor Connie Pope, Sneed, and his lawyer Gina Walker regarding this challenge.

Pope’s co-counsel Gary Ackley informed investigators for the legislation agency Reed Smith — whom legislators retained professional bono to conduct an unbiased evaluation of the case — that he was by no means informed about Sneed’s need to recant or negotiate a greater deal for himself. “Any prosecutor can be involved about any cooperating witness in any large case relating to the uncertainty of the waffling backwards and forwards and the disingenuous unhealthy religion nature of such actions,” including that this proof clearly needed to be disclosed to the protection.

The petition additionally introduced proof lengthy hidden within the prosecution’s case file that Pope lied to the courtroom, withheld proof of quite a few improper pretrial and midtrial communications with Sneed, violated a witness sequestration order, and manufactured false testimony from Sneed to plug holes within the prosecution case that had developed throughout the trial.

Sneed had testified at Glossip’s first trial that Glossip had employed him to kill Van Timber and that, appearing alone, he had overwhelmed Van Treese to dying utilizing solely a baseball bat. In the course of the retrial, medical testimony established that Van Treese additionally had been stabbed and that the distinctive blade of a pocketknife discovered beneath Van Treese physique may have brought on these wounds. When the protection lastly obtained entry to the prosecution file, they found a midtrial letter from Pope to Sneed’s lawyer that there “are just a few objects which were testified to that I wanted to debate with Justin,” and that “[o]ur greatest drawback remains to be the knife.” Sneed then modified his account of the homicide to comport with the medical testimony, claiming that he additionally had stabbed Van Treese, and Pope feigned shock to the courtroom when the protection accused her of a discovery violation for failing to disclose the complete scope of Sneed’s anticipated testimony.

Glossip’s petition burdened the exculpatory nature of the proof regarding the knife. “If Sneed didn’t use the pocketknife, then any person else should have been contained in the room, and that flatly contradicted the state’s case that rested on Sneed’s account of committing the homicide alone,” counsel wrote. In the course of the press convention, Glossip’s lead counsel, Don Knight, stated that the prosecutor’s deliberate violation of the sequestration order to produce info to Sneed “calls into critical query the reliability of his testimony. That info was recognized by the prosecution since 2004, by no means turned over to the protection in any respect. … Not solely did the prosecution destroy proof, they manufactured proof. They modified folks’s testimony. They broke the foundations, all to attempt to get a conviction in opposition to Wealthy Glossip on a dying penalty case that ought to by no means have been introduced in any respect.”

No bodily proof connects Glossip to Van Treese’s homicide and, insisting on his innocence, he turned down a plea deal at his trial for a parole-eligible life sentence. His conviction and dying sentence rested totally on the repeatedly altering accounts of the homicide offered by Sneed. A number of witnesses have since come ahead with proof that Sneed falsely implicated Glossip to be able to keep away from the dying penalty.

In February 2022, a bipartisan group of 35 Oklahoma legislators engaged professional bono attorneys at Reed Smith to evaluation the case. Whereas the agency’s evaluation was underway, Oklahoma Legal professional Normal John O’Connor filed a movement with the Oklahoma Courtroom of Felony Appeals on June 10, 2022 in search of execution dates for 25 Oklahoma death-row prisoners, together with Glossip. Reed Smith issued its report 5 days later, documenting that prosecutors had destroyed key exculpatory information upfront of Glossip’s retrial and concluding that no affordable jury introduced with all of the proof would have convicted him. The agency’s persevering with investigation into the case has produced much more proof of prosecutorial misconduct and Glossip’s doubtless innocence, which it launched in supplemental experiences issued on August 9, August 23, and September 20, 2022.

In two orders issued on July 1, the courtroom granted O’Connor’s request to set the execution dates, scheduling Glossip’s execution for September 22. Together with his execution date pending, Glossip filed a petition within the Oklahoma Courtroom of Felony Appeals in search of a brand new trial primarily based on the preliminary Reed Smith report. Governor Kevin Stitt briefly stayed Glossip’s execution on August 16, 2022, to offer the appeals courtroom time to find out whether or not to grant Glossip a listening to on his innocence declare and rescheduled Glossip’s execution for December 8, 2022.

Two-thirds of Oklahoma’s legislators, led by Republican State Consultant Kevin McDugle, despatched a letter to Legal professional Normal John O’Connor urging him to assist Glossip’s request for a brand new listening to. O’Connor declined and is continuous to oppose granting Glossip a chance to current proof to the courtroom.

“I’m not afraid to have a listening to,” Knight stated on the press convention. “I feel the state is afraid to have a listening to. They only wish to kill this man.”