In Glossip v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court must determine if a possibly innocent prisoner can be executed against the state's will, highlighting the complexities of capital punishment.
Richard Glossip argues that key evidence was concealed and false testimony presented during his trial, raising questions about his wrongful conviction and the integrity of capital punishment.
The far-right Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruled against Glossip, attempting to insulate its decision from review, presenting a legal challenge that the Supreme Court now must address.
Justice Thomas defended the prosecutors, showcasing a divide within the Court, while Justice Sotomayor brought attention to the potential violation of Glossip's due process rights.
Collection
[
|
...
]