The AP reports, "Gov. Kasich grants two-week reprieve to death-row inmate." It's by Andrew Welsh-Huggins, via the News-Messenger.
Republican Gov. John Kasich on Tuesday issued a rare last-minute reprieve for a condemned killer, sparing Abdul Awkal for two weeks to allow a judge to hold a hearing on his mental competency.
Kasich ordered the delay to allow a Cuyahoga County judge to conduct a hearing on whether Awkal is too mentally ill to be put to death. Judge Stuart Friedman ruled Monday there was evidence to believe Awkal was not competent to be executed, but his ruling was not enough to stop the execution.
Kasich's decision came shortly after the Ohio Supreme Court had refused to delay the execution to allow the hearing. Governors in Ohio have the ultimate say on executions.
Former death row inmate John Spirko received reprieves from two governors before he was spared, but such interventions by governors have been infrequent since Ohio resumed executions in 1999.
"Kasich grants 2-week reprieve to courthouse killer facing execution," by Alan Johnson and Rebecca McKinsey for the Columbus Dispatch.
A Cleveland man who gunned down his estranged wife and brother-in-law in a courthouse basement got a two-week reprieve from execution from Gov. John Kasich yesterday.
Abdul Hamin Awkal, 53, was to be lethally injected at 10 a.m. today at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville.
However, late yesterday afternoon, Kasich unexpectedly used his executive clemency power to postpone Awkal’s execution. He said in a statement that the time will allow Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Stuart Friedman to hold a hearing to determine whether Awkal is mentally competent to be executed.
The reprieve was requested by Awkal’s attorneys, not by a court or judge. It was an “internal decision” made solely by Kasich’s office, a spokeswoman said.
Just last week, Kasich denied clemency for Awkal without comment.
And:
Several doctors recently deemed Awkal fit for execution. However, attorneys at the Justice and Policy Center who represent Awkal located Pablo Stewart, a California-based psychiatrist, who said Awkal was unfit for execution. In addition, Phillip Resnick, one of three psychiatrists who originally found Awkal competent, said he was now uncertain.
Today's Cleveland Plain Dealer also carries an OpEd, "Exercise caution before executing the severely mentally ill." It's by William T. Robinson III, President of the American Bar Association.
Abdul Awkal's case raises many serious questions. First, his lawyers contend that he is severely mentally ill and does not have a rational understanding of the reason he will be executed. Indeed, the evidence indicates that Mr. Awkal's mental illness began well before the crime for which he was sentenced to death. He was only able to stand trial after receiving powerful antipsychotic drugs, and experts agree that his mental health condition deteriorated after his conviction. Mr. Awkal's lawyers indicate that he has been unable to communicate meaningfully with them or assist them with his appeals. According to medical experts, Mr. Awkal now suffers from visual and auditory hallucinations, meaning that he hears voices and sees things that are not real. He believes he is being executed because the CIA wants him dead, not because of his crime.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it is unconstitutional to execute a person such as Mr. Awkal whose mental impairment prevents him from having the necessary understanding of the nature and purpose of the death penalty and the reason it is imposed in his case. That is also the policy of the American Bar Association. Our position is grounded in centuries of historical precedent, dating back to the year 1680, when the legal jurists of the day expressed concern over the "miserable spectacle" of executing someone who is mentally incompetent. Like those jurists, we believe the goals of capital punishment are not served by executing an offender who lacks a meaningful understanding that the state is taking his life in order to hold him accountable for taking the life of one or more persons.
Earlier coverage of Abdul Awkal's case begins at the link. Related posts are in the clemency, competency, and mental illness indexes.
The Supreme Court established standards to assess whether severely mentally ill inmates are competent to be executed in a 1986 case, Ford v. Wainwright; more via Oyez.
Comments