<< The JetBlue Pilot | Main | Scalia and Garner on Reading Law >>

The Awkal Case

AP reports:

An inmate is too mentally ill to be executed for the killings of his wife and brother-in-law, a judge ruled Friday in a decision that comes just a week after the governor issued a reprieve hours before the man was set to die.

"Abdul Awkal presently lacks the capacity to form a rational understanding as to the reason the state intends to execute him," Cuyahoga County Judge Stuart Friedman said. "Abdul Awkal may not be executed unless and until he has been restored to competency."
See prior post.


I understand the heartfelt emotions of the victims' family members in this case. That said, I think it takes alot of nerve to insist, without knowing the full record or evidence before the judge, that it is "a travesty" for the judge who sentenced Abdul Akwal to death to conclude that he now meets the standards for incompetence set forth in Panetti and Ford. Do you think it's possible that the sentencing judge knows more about this subject than you do?

If this sentence is ultimately not carried out (and what a wuss Kasich is), then expect a miraculous recovery.

2:54: Anything is possible, but given the unique facts of this case, including the details of the past few weeks, it certainly seems plausible that the cynical version is likely the true version of events.

And that justice is again delayed in this case is a travesty irrespective of the defendant's mental state.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives