Today's editorial is, "Ethics questions in Charles Dean Hood case."
It is impossible to stand by the murder conviction of Charles Dean Hood without examining charges of corruption against the very Collin County court where he was sentenced to die.
Yet there has been no indication that courts at any level are interested in delving into accusations of unethical, unconstitutional behavior – a secret affair – by the trial judge and district attorney.
The public deserves more than avoidance. This is more than a question of guilt or innocence of one man. Rather, the judiciary must recognize the cloud of suspicion that hovers and the need to clear the air.
Failure to do so risks casting doubt on the quality of justice for the entire period in which Tom O'Connell was DA and Sue Holland presided over cases brought by his office. The integrity of other cases is drawn into question, and that is an affront to a host of crime victims.
As it stands, Presiding State District Judge John Nelms of Collin County has reset Mr. Hood's execution date for Sept. 10. He passed up the chance to examine years-old attacks on Judge Holland's impartiality, kicking the matter up to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. That prolonged the unseemly game of hot potato that has been going on since the postponement of Mr. Hood's last date with the executioner, June 17.
Earlier coverage of the Hood case is here.
Comments