{"id":1127190,"date":"2024-07-20T04:22:10","date_gmt":"2024-07-20T08:22:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/uncategorized\/missouri-ag-asks-missouri-supreme-court-to-block-hearing-on-dna-evidence-proving-marcellus-williams-innocence-innocence-project\/"},"modified":"2024-07-20T04:22:10","modified_gmt":"2024-07-20T08:22:10","slug":"missouri-ag-asks-missouri-supreme-court-to-block-hearing-on-dna-evidence-proving-marcellus-williams-innocence-innocence-project","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/dna\/missouri-ag-asks-missouri-supreme-court-to-block-hearing-on-dna-evidence-proving-marcellus-williams-innocence-innocence-project\/","title":{"rendered":"Missouri AG Asks Missouri Supreme Court to Block Hearing on DNA Evidence Proving Marcellus Williams&#8217; Innocence &#8211; Innocence Project"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    (July 18, 2024)Today, Attorney General    Andrew Bailey of Missouri filed awrit    of prohibition asking the Missouri Supreme Court    to block theCircuit Court of St. Louis Countyfrom    hearing the DNA evidence that proves Marcellus Williamss    innocence. The circuit court had recentlyscheduled a    hearing for August 21 to assess the clear and convincing    evidence of actual innocence that led Prosecuting Attorney    Wesley Bell to move to vacate Mr. Williamss wrongful    conviction and death sentence. Despite overwhelming evidence of    his innocence, Missouri has scheduled Mr. Williams for    execution on September 24, 2024.  <\/p>\n<p>    Below is a statement from Tricia Rojo Bushnell, one of    Marcellus Williamss attorneys followed by case    background:  <\/p>\n<p>    Instead of using the offices time and resources to review the    merits of Marcellus Williamss innocence claim, the Attorney    General seeks to delay a court from even hearing the evidence    until it is too late. Indeed, when the prosecutor filed a    motion to vacate Mr. Williamss conviction in January, the    Attorney General told the circuit court it was planning to file    an oppositionbut waited four monthsuntil after    an execution date was setto argue the court cannot hear the    case. The evidence could have been heard in those four months.    It can still be heard now. Instead of trying to prevent the    circuit court from considering the DNA evidence that exonerates    Mr. Williams, the Attorney General should join us in this    truth-seeking process in Mr. Williamss case.  <\/p>\n<p>    -Tricia Rojo Bushnell, attorney for Marcellus Williams  <\/p>\n<p>    Background on Marcellus Williamss Innocence    Case  <\/p>\n<p>    DNA Evidence Proves Marcellus Williams is Innocent    and the Prosecuting Attorney Seeks to Vacate His Wrongful    Conviction, Yet Missouri has Scheduled His Execution for    September 24  <\/p>\n<p>    Marcellus Williams is scheduled to be executed on September 24    for a crime DNA proves he did not commit. The St. Louis County    Prosecuting Attorney reviewed these DNA results and filed    amotion    to vacateMr. Williamss conviction because he    believed the DNA results proved by clear and convincing    evidence that Mr. Williams did not commit this crime. The    circuit court has scheduled a hearing for August 21 to consider    the exculpatory evidence and resolve the prosecuting attorneys    motion.  <\/p>\n<p>    A crime scene covered with forensic evidence    contained no link to Mr. Williams  <\/p>\n<p>    Mr. Williams has been seeking to prove his innocence throughout    the 24 years he has spent on Missouris death row. On August    11, 1998, Felicia Gayle, a former reporter for theSt.    Louis Post-Dispatch, was found stabbed to death in her    home. The perpetrator left behind considerable forensic    evidence, including fingerprints, a bloody shoeprint, hair, and    trace DNA on the murder weapon, a knife from Ms. Gayles    kitchen.None of this forensic evidence    matches Mr. Williams.  <\/p>\n<p>    A case built on snitch witnesses  <\/p>\n<p>    The case against Mr. Williams turned on the testimony of two    unreliable witnesses who were incentivized by promises of    leniency in their own pending criminal cases and reward money.    The investigation had gone cold when a jail inmate named Henry    Cole, a man with a lengthy record, claimed that Mr. Williams    confessed to him, while they were both locked up in jail, that    he committed the murder. Cole directed police to Laura Asaro, a    woman who had briefly dated Mr. Williams and had an extensive    record of her own.  <\/p>\n<p>    Both of these individuals were known fabricators; neither    revealed any information that was not either included in media    accounts about the case or already known to the police. Their    statements were inconsistent with their own prior statements,    with each others accounts, and with the crime scene evidence,    and none of the information they provided could be    independently verified. Aside from their testimony, the only    evidence connecting Mr. Williams to the crime was a witness who    said Mr. Williams sold him a laptop taken from the victims    home, but the jury did not learn that Mr. Williams told the    witness he had received the laptop from Laura Asaro.  <\/p>\n<p>    New DNA testing confirms Mr. Williams is innocent    yet no court has considered that evidence  <\/p>\n<p>    As he has fought to prove his innocence, Mr. Williams has    repeatedly faced imminent execution. To date, no court has    given substantive consideration to the evidence exonerating    him; the August 21 hearing will be the first time a court    engages in that review.  <\/p>\n<p>    Nine years ago, the Missouri Supreme Court stayed Mr.    Williamss execution and appointed a special master to review    DNA testing of potentially exculpatory    evidence.This testing showed that Mr.    Williams was not the source of male DNA found on the murder    weapon.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, in 2017, after the testing was completed but without    conducting a hearing or making any findings based on the    outcome of the testing, the appointed special master sent Mr.    Williamss case back to the Missouri Supreme Court. That court,    also without considering the DNA testing results, again    scheduled Mr. Williamss execution.  <\/p>\n<p>    Recognizing that the new evidence raised serious doubts about    Mr. Williamss guilt, on August 22, 2017, mere hours before his    execution and after his last meal, then-Governor Eric Greitens    stayed the execution and convened a Board of Inquiry to    investigate the case. Under Missouri law, the stay was to    remain in place until the Board of Inquiry concluded its review    and issued a formal report.  <\/p>\n<p>    Yet in June 2023, while the Board of Inquirys review remained    ongoing, Governor Mike Parson without warning or notice    dissolved the Board without a report or recommendation from the    Board. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey then promptly    sought a new execution date. Mr. Williams sued Governor Parson    because the dissolution of the Board without a report or    recommendation violated the law and Mr. Williamss    constitutional rights. The Governor tried to dismiss the    lawsuit, but a Cole County civil judge denied that request. The    Governor then asked the Missouri Supreme Court to intervene.    The Missouri Supreme Court agreed to do so and on June 4, 2024,    it dismissed the lawsuit and immediately scheduled Mr.    Williamss execution for September 24, 2024.  <\/p>\n<p>    The St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney has    concluded that Mr. Williams is actually innocent and moved to    vacate his conviction  <\/p>\n<p>    After the exculpatory DNA evidence was brought to his    attention, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell    appointed a special prosecutor to review Mr. Williamss case.    The special prosecutor reviewed the findings of three    independent DNA experts. All three concluded that Mr.    Williamswas not the source of male DNA on the    weapon,and therefore could not have killed    Ms. Gayle. Mr. Williamss exclusion from the murder weapon is    consistent with his exclusion from other forensic evidence    collected from the crime scene including a bloody shoeprint and    hairs found near the victims body.  <\/p>\n<p>    Recognizing that new evidence suggests that Mr. Williams is    actually innocent (p.3), in January 2024 the St. Louis County    Prosecuting Attorney filed amotion    to vacateMr. Williamss conviction. The motion    explains: DNA evidence supporting a conclusion that Mr.    Williams was not the individual who stabbed Ms. Gayle has never    been considered by any court. This never-before-considered    evidence, when paired with the relative paucity of other,    credible evidence supporting guilt . . . casts inexorable doubt    on Mr. Williamss conviction and sentence. (p.1) The    Prosecuting Attorney urged the circuit court to begin the    process of correcting this manifest injustice by [holding] a    hearing on the newfound evidence and the integrity of Mr.    Williamss conviction. (p.3)  <\/p>\n<p>    The Missouri Attorney General continues its history    of fighting innocence cases  <\/p>\n<p>    Although the Prosecuting Attorneys motion remains pending and    the law requires the circuit court to hold a hearing on it, as    that court recognized, the Missouri Attorney General has taken    the position that Mr. Williamss innocence does not matter, and    the Missouri Supreme Court has scheduled his execution.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Missouri Attorney Generals office has argued in other    death penalty cases that even DNA evidence of innocence is not    enough to stop an execution. In a2003    oral argument before the Missouri Supreme Court, Justice    Laura Denvir Stith asked Assistant Attorney General Frank Jung,    Are you suggesting  even if we find that Mr. Amrine is    actually innocent, he should be executed? That is correct,    your honor, Jung replied. The Missouri Supreme Court    ultimately disagreed, and Amrine was exonerated. But over 20    years later, the same arguments are still being made.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Missouri Attorney Generals Office has opposed every    innocence casefor the last 30 years,including every    attempt made by a local prosecutorto overturn a    conviction on the basis of innocence, as the St. Louis County    Prosecuting Attorney is doing in Mr. Williamss case. In 2021    and 2023 Kevin Strickland and Lamar Johnson were exonerated    despite the Attorney Generals attempts to thwart the    prosecutors motions to vacate.  <\/p>\n<p>    Incentivized informants are a leading cause of    wrongful convictions  <\/p>\n<p>    Jailhouse informant testimony like that leading to Mr.    Williamss conviction is one of the leading contributing    factors of wrongful convictions nationally, playing a role    in15%    of DNA exoneration cases.Eleven of    the54individuals exonerated in Missouri were    convicted with the use of informant testimony.  <\/p>\n<p>    In capital cases, false testimony from incentivized witnesses    is theleading cause of wrongful convictions, with    informant testimony present in 49.5% of wrongful convictions    since the mid-1970s (Source: Warden, R. 2005.The snitch    system: How snitch testimony sent Randy Steidl and other    innocent Americans to death row. Center on Wrongful    Convictions.)  <\/p>\n<p>    Racial bias contributed to Mr. Williamss wrongful    conviction  <\/p>\n<p>    Mr. Williams, a Black man, was wrongfully convicted of    murdering a white woman. His jury was comprised of 11 white    people and only one Black person. The prosecutor, whose    institutional practice of racially discriminatory jury    selection has been widelydocumented,    successfully removed six of seven qualified Black prospective    jurors with peremptory challenges. Arecent    studyof 400 death-eligible cases in St. Louis County    over a 27 year period also revealed racial disparity in the use    of the death penalty based upon the race of the victim.    Defendants were 3.5 times more likely to receive the death    penalty if the victim was white, as in this case, compared to    if the victim was Black.  <\/p>\n<p>    Mr. Williams is devoutly religious and an    accomplished poet  <\/p>\n<p>    During his 24 years in prison, Mr. Williams has devoted much of    his time to studying Islam and writing poetry. He serves as the    imam for Muslim prisoners at Potosi Correctional Center and is    known as Khaliifah. He has an exemplary prison record and is    widely respected within the prison community and beyond.  <\/p>\n<p>    Read more about Marcellus Williamss case atwww.savemarcellus.orgorwww.marcelluswilliams.org.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>See original here:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/innocenceproject.org\/ag-asks-missouri-supreme-court-to-block-hearing-on-dna-evidence-marcellus-williams-innocence\/\" title=\"Missouri AG Asks Missouri Supreme Court to Block Hearing on DNA Evidence Proving Marcellus Williams' Innocence - Innocence Project\" rel=\"noopener\">Missouri AG Asks Missouri Supreme Court to Block Hearing on DNA Evidence Proving Marcellus Williams' Innocence - Innocence Project<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> (July 18, 2024)Today, Attorney General Andrew Bailey of Missouri filed awrit of prohibition asking the Missouri Supreme Court to block theCircuit Court of St. Louis Countyfrom hearing the DNA evidence that proves Marcellus Williamss innocence. The circuit court had recentlyscheduled a hearing for August 21 to assess the clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence that led Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell to move to vacate Mr.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/dna\/missouri-ag-asks-missouri-supreme-court-to-block-hearing-on-dna-evidence-proving-marcellus-williams-innocence-innocence-project\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1127190","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-dna"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1127190"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1127190"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1127190\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1127190"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1127190"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1127190"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}