home

Supreme Court Rejects Stay in Teresa Lewis Execution

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 08:11:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

On Thursday, Teresa Lewis will be the first woman to be executed in Virginia since 1912. (Background here:)

Teresa Lewis didn't pull the trigger. She confessed, pleaded guilty and cooperated with authorities. She has an IQ of 70, right on the border of mental retardation. She has no prior criminal record, and no prior history of violence. The triggermen in the murder got life without parole.

The Supreme Court has denied her request for a stay of execution. Her August, 2010 petition for clemency, denied by VA Gov. Robert McDonnell, is here. Gov. McDonnell yesterday again refused to grant clemency.

The execution is scheduled for September 23, 2010, 9:00 p.m., Greensville Correctional Center, Jarratt, Virginia.

< House to Vote on Misleading Bill Creating More Drug Crimes | Traveling the Globe With Probationer Paris Hilton >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Supreme Court Rejects Stay in Teresa Lewis Execution | 72 comments (72 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Disgusting (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:04:58 AM EST
    We are barbarians.

    I'm not (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Matt v on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 06:20:48 AM EST
    so sure about that.  Even barbarians can show mercy.


    Parent
    It all for politics (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Saul on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 07:56:07 AM EST
    Most governors will not give clemency because to them its political suicide on the next election

    This person did wrong but does not deserve the death penalty.

    Didn't the Supreme Court rule that (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 10:51:51 AM EST
    it was cruel and unusual punishment to execute someone who was mentally retarded? What was the threshold for determining that? Her IQ is 70, wasn't the number they chose?

    The triggermen got life without parole. Our justice system needs an overhaul.

    Her IQ is "just above 70". (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by me only on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 12:28:32 PM EST
    not 70 as the diary indicates.

    She waited 45 minutes to call 911.  Her husband told the police that his wife knew the triggermen.

    She was supposed to be the adult (33 years old), the triggermen were 20 and 21.  She had sex with both and encouraged her 16 year old daughter to have sex with one of them.

    She gave the men $1,200 to purchase the shotguns used in the killings.

    Parent

    So I guess your point is (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 04:48:17 PM EST
    that this very low IQ (nearly diagnosable as mentally retarded) woman was the "mastermind" of the plot?  And that her prior abuse by the husband and sexual exploitation by the triggerman are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a life sentence, rather than death ... that is, of all the thousands of first degree murderers who are not subjected to the death penalty, she is one of the worst of the worst?  Let me just say it this way:  I'm not persuaded.

    Parent
    No ... (none / 0) (#44)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 04:56:32 PM EST
    the point is that her very low IQ does not excuse her from plotting to kill her husband.

    Does it matter if she is the mastermind? She plotted their murders with someone, and carried it out.

    All three of them should get the death penalty.

    Parent

    That's much more clear. (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:05:25 PM EST
    I now understand your point.  You believe that everyone guilty of first degree murder should be sentenced to death.  You are entitled to believe that; it's a free country, as they say.  However, the Supreme Court declared the system you believe in unconstitutional in 1976.  I'm talking about the real world of today's capital punishment system.  Only the "worst of the worst," objectively identified to the extent possible, should be sentenced to death.  Otherwise, the penalty is a life sentence.  No one on this thread has suggested for one second that they would "excuse her from plotting to kill her husband," despite your repetition of that irrelevancy.  Guilt and punishment are two different issues (unless, as I said, you subscribe to automatic and mandatory death sentences, which are unconstitutional).

    Parent
    It is has become pretty clear (none / 0) (#45)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 04:58:48 PM EST
    that her actual IQ is significantly higher than what is being reported.

    Parent
    Funny How That Is (none / 0) (#47)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:17:47 PM EST
    An individual's IQ seems to vary quite a bid, depending on the subject matter.

    This thread is proof of that theory.

    Parent

    Thanks for the grin. (none / 0) (#48)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:20:38 PM EST
    Like Anne pointed out, your humor is probably not intentional...

    Parent
    Intention? (none / 0) (#53)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:31:57 PM EST
    Well, my guess is that the relative level of intended or unintended humor in my comments are directly proportional to IQ.

    For those who feel that they are laughing at my expense, knock yourself out. It is my pleasure.  You probably need a good laugh, even if it is of the low quality guffaw, along the lines of schadenfreude.

    ymmv

    lol

    Parent

    No, my point was (none / 0) (#59)
    by me only on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 09:26:15 PM EST
    that Jeralyn is painting a picture of sympathy, one not entirely in accordance with the facts.

    Personally, I really don't care.  The judge decided that she warranted the death penalty.  He is more qualified than you or I in this matter.  He does not have a history of hang'em high.  The appeals court did not overturn, the Supreme Court saw fit to leave it be and the governor did not grant clemency.

    But I guess your point is you will always find some reason to oppose the death penalty.  Color me totally unconvinced.

    Parent

    Not Defined (none / 0) (#7)
    by JDB on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 11:56:17 AM EST
    IIRC, the Supremes left the definition of "mentally retarded" to the states and didn't set a cutoff IQ level.

    Parent
    How convenient. Thanks for the info (none / 0) (#8)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 12:04:25 PM EST


    Parent
    Executing Teresa will serve no purpose at all (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Edger on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 11:37:34 AM EST
    Even most people who try to argue for the death penalty based on their usual argument - that it would be a 'deterrent' to others (which has been shown time and again to be a meritless argument) - can't possibly be dumb enough to think executing her would 'deter' anyone else with an IQ of 70, can they?

    Especially since it obviously doesn't deter them from killing someone.

    I'm just wondering what (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:13:56 PM EST
    the critical level of executions has to become before the spiritual rebirth of conservative libertarianism starts sweeping the nation. Of course, some would say that murderers of limited acumen are attempting to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps and take control of their lives in the only way they know how..

    And for many here, life continues to be sacred and full of promise until they say it isn't..

     

    Interesting thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:45:01 PM EST
    No one who wants her killed even bothers to attempt any justification beyond "she should die!" simply because they want her to.

    Parent
    Blood Lust (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:48:09 PM EST
    It is a real phenomena, particularly virulent when the proponents do not get their white shirts dirty from the blood spray during the execution.

    Just like teevee.

    Parent

    I just wanna see some (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:03:30 PM EST
    evidence-data from the nyrias-su quarter that all the executions - including all those recognized lynchings, in say, the last hundred years, provide any evidence that the country has become any less violent after all this cleansing of the gene pool and all these lessons in personal responsibility.

    Parent
    Less Violent? (none / 0) (#37)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:09:41 PM EST
    If narius is any example, the answer is a clear "no".

    Parent
    Well.. (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:23:07 PM EST
    it must be the fault of the welfare state. Just look at all the violence in all those Scandinavian countries with all their state supplied safety nets..

    Parent
    You haven't seen any data? (none / 0) (#49)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:21:06 PM EST
    Violent crime in the US has been in decline since 92-93.

    CA, which has the 3-strike laws, has a dramatic DECREASE of violent crime from 345k in 1992, to 174k, in 2009. Note that in the SAME period of time, the population of CA grew from 30M to 37M

    http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm

    So i don't know the reason, but i DO know that violent crime is down in the nation, and CA specifically.

    Parent

    Post hoc (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 08:54:15 PM EST
    ergo propter hoc.

    Parent
    there is no claim (none / 0) (#65)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 12:49:23 PM EST
    of cause & effect in my post.

    I just note that coincidental timing of the 3-strike laws.

    And there is NO DOUBT that crime went down DRAMATICALLY in CA over the past decade.

    Are you disputing this FACT which is backed up by government statistics?

    Parent

    BTW, (none / 0) (#66)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 12:50:29 PM EST
    while the data does not PROVE that the 3-strike law is the reason, it also does NOT rule it out.


    Parent
    Hmmm . . . . (none / 0) (#51)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:24:37 PM EST
    seems like there is a lot of gun violence on the news here in the Bay Area. makes NYC sound relatively tame . . .

    Parent
    "seems like"???? (none / 0) (#64)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 12:48:13 PM EST
    Is that a statistical statement?

    The numbers are very clear. Violent crime rate has gone DOWN in CA. Are you suggesting that your "impression" is more accurate than government compiled statistics?

    Parent

    wow i guess (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by CST on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 01:05:27 PM EST
    all those illegal immigrants aren't violent criminals after all.

    There is a difference between correlation and causation.  There is no proof of causation here.  There are plenty of other reasons why violent crime rates might have dropped that have nothing to do with the 3 strikes rule.

    Parent

    and no where did i claim .. (none / 0) (#69)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 02:25:11 PM EST
    that there is a casual effect. READ my post carefully.

    I am merely responding to a question of whether we are getting more violent.

    And the answer is NO, if violent crime is what we are measuring.

    Parent

    And in their minds (none / 0) (#35)
    by Edger on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:55:18 PM EST
    people who kill should be put to death.

    Good thing they have us to say no to it. They'd really have a problem if we agreed with them. ;-)

    Parent

    and planning & carrying out .. (none / 0) (#50)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:22:59 PM EST
    the murder of her OWN husband and SON are not reasons enough?

    Parent
    No, (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 08:52:42 PM EST
    not nearly enough.

    Parent
    I am glad that (none / 0) (#63)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 12:36:55 PM EST
    judge & jury saw things differently.

    To MANY, including me, planning & carrying out the murder of one's own spouse + children are WAY more than enough.

    Parent

    Again, you are entitled to your personal opinion (none / 0) (#68)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 01:58:42 PM EST
    but it is inconsistent with the settled constitutional law -- designed by very conservative Supreme Court justices -- which governs and regulates capital punishment, and has done so for the last 35 years.  There must exist one or more significant, pre-defined (statutory), aggravating factors -- above and beyond the "mere" commission of a first degree murder -- and those "aggravators" must outweigh any and all mitigating factors (having to do with the nature of the offense or of the offender).  

    Parent
    and .. (none / 0) (#70)
    by nyrias on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 02:28:25 PM EST
    in this case, it is not a first degree murder. It is a DOUBLE murder of those closest to the perpetrator .. those who TRUSTED her.

    And apparently, my PERSONAL OPINION, with respect to this particular case, is in-line with the jury and judge. And since the supreme court decline to intervene, it seems that, once again IN THIS CASE, my opinion is consistent with theirs.

    Parent

    nyarias (none / 0) (#72)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 07:35:25 PM EST
    your opinion is noted more than once. You are now chattering see the comment rules. Please stop. This is a criminal defense site and your views supporting the death penalty are noted and have been expressed sufficiently. No more please.

    Parent
    statutory aggravators (none / 0) (#71)
    by lc on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 03:43:20 PM EST
    In the jurisdiction I live in, more than one murder victim is an aggravator.  So is murder for monetary gain.

    I also find the borderline mentally retarded IQ to be extremely suspect, especially if it wasn't diagnosed until she was on death row for this crime.

    I understand being against the death penalty, but I don't find Teresa Lewis to be a very sympathetic character.

    Parent

    our country was founded on Chrisitan pinciples... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Yes2Truth on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 11:15:34 AM EST

     No, sorry -  make that Old Testament verses.

    Jeremiah got together (none / 0) (#28)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:28:00 PM EST
    for a tryst in the dunes with Ayn Rand..

    To teach people personal responsibility.

    Parent

    "IQ 50-70 - Mild mental retardation" (none / 0) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 12:55:00 PM EST
    Her IQ is 72.

    Add: (none / 0) (#14)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:29:44 PM EST
    The IQ score she attained when directed to take an IQ test as part of her trial procedure was 72 (performance IQ was 79).

    Clearly, as a HS grad and having completed a year of college, it would benefit her case to try to not do well on the court-ordered IQ test...

    Parent

    Did she? (none / 0) (#15)
    by me only on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:47:06 PM EST
    At 16, Lewis dropped out of school and left home to marry a man she met in church. When that marriage ended in divorce, she began to drink heavily and pop pills she was prescribed for abdominal pain.

    go back?

    I agree that doing well on the test was absolutely not in her self interest.

    Parent

    HS grad, according to the intertubes... (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:02:06 PM EST
    Despite the low IQ scores, the examiner pointed out that Lewis completed high school as well as a year of college and concluded that she was competent to stand trial and enter plea agreements, according to court documents.


    Parent
    Regarding purposely taking a dive on the IQ (none / 0) (#24)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:15:53 PM EST
    test:
    As part of his evaluation, Dr. Hagan administered the same intelligence test that Lewis had been given during the earlier assessment of her competency to stand trial.

    Dr. Hagan reported that Lewis obtained a full scale I.Q. test score of 70, a performance I.Q. test score of 74, and a verbal I.Q. test score
    of 72.

    After considering Lewis' various achievements during her life, Dr. Hagen concluded that these I.Q. test scores represented an "underestimate" of Lewis' intellect, and that she had not put forth her best effort during the I.Q. test.

    Dr. Hagan provided examples of Lewis' "adaptive functioning," which he stated supported his conclusion that Lewis was not mentally retarded.

    Dr. Hagen noted that Lewis had never failed a grade level at school, and had not been terminated from any job due to an inability to understand her employment duties.

    Lewis also had demonstrated the conceptual ability to respond and attend to her parents' needs, and she had successfully completed a certified nursing assistant program at a local community college.



    Parent
    google Dr Death + Texas (none / 0) (#25)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:23:09 PM EST
    for an example of how the 'scientific' Dr Hagens of the world can sometimes be enabled by the state to operate for years of a perversely distorted ideology..

    Parent
    out of.. (none / 0) (#26)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:25:51 PM EST


    Parent
    This Dr. Hagen's logic seems pretty compelling (none / 0) (#27)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:26:41 PM EST
    to me.

    Parent
    Something tells me (none / 0) (#29)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:29:37 PM EST
    you'd find it compelling if he hadn't said anything..

    But perhaps I'm being unfair.

    Parent

    Something tells me (1.00 / 0) (#30)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:35:14 PM EST
    you'd have discounted his testimony even if she'd been a U Buffalo grad.

    If you do have something of value to add to this discussion, what would that be?

    Parent

    I doubt someone (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:46:11 PM EST
    who seems to think the use of capital punishment is integral to building some unique-in-history libertarian utopia here would agree with my assessment of what constitutes valuable information relating to the subject, no matter what I said.  

    Parent
    iow, you got nothing. No biggie, most don't. (none / 0) (#40)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:27:10 PM EST


    Parent
    well I guess that's the last word.. (none / 0) (#41)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:43:33 PM EST
    you should really check out a book titled Albion's Fatal Tree, su. It goes into forensic detail about the period in England from the late 17th to the early 19th century, when the laws in England became so draconian that they were literally hanging twelve year olds for stealing draperies. After a hundred or so years of very publicly, luridly, 'setting examples' for the people, it started becoming obvious to even the most conservative in England that the trend was doing little to stem the rate of crime and efforts toward reform of the law and treatment of criminals began to gain ground.    

    Parent
    You sould read about the death (none / 0) (#61)
    by me only on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 09:32:50 PM EST
    penalty in Singapore.

    Parent
    right, or Saudi Arabia and China.. (none / 0) (#62)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 11:52:36 PM EST
    or any number of other places that illustrate how some people's moral development stopped around the time the Code of Hammurabi was written.

    Parent
    plus ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:51:23 PM EST
    being STUPID is not an excuse for capital murder.

    Parent
    LOL .. you guys are (none / 0) (#11)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 12:59:57 PM EST
    defending someone who plotted to kill her own HUSBAND and SON????

    She should be executed. She may be STUPID, but she does not meet the standard of being retarded. And i quote "no medical professional has concluded that Teresa Lewis meets the medical or statutory definition of mentally retarded."

    In fact, her plotting shows at least some ability of reasoning. She gave money to the gunman to buy guns. She unlocked the door. She waited before calling 911.

    She wouldn't have to do any of those things if she didn't want her husband and SON dead. Being STUPID is not a defense of heinous crimes.

     

    Pointing out that there is enough mitigation (5.00 / 0) (#43)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 04:55:10 PM EST
    to justify a sentence of life without parole, rather than death, is hardly "defending" or "making excuses" for murder.  The death penalty should be abolished, but as long as we have it, we should reserve it for the cases which are demonstrably and incontrovertibly the "worst of the worst" ... the ones with no articulable mitigation.  This is not that sort of case.

    Parent
    Sounds Crazy? No? (none / 0) (#12)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:16:10 PM EST
    defending someone who plotted to kill her own HUSBAND and SON????

    If you followed the case, rather than the Police Blotter cliff notes, you would realize that she is not only low on intelligence, but she is crazy, not criminal.

    Hope the orgasm you have at imagining her death, makes you feel safer.

    Parent

    .. and LOW on intelligence (none / 0) (#16)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:47:40 PM EST
    is a defense on capital murder? You do know that she went to college.

    I am glad that juries and judges did NOT agree with you that someone who PLANNED and murdered her husband and son is CRIMINAL, not just crazy.

    I feel safer ALREADY knowing that most juries and judges do not make excuses for VIOLENT CRIMINALS like you do.


    Parent

    what did she study in college? (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:47:03 PM EST
    many things you can take college courses for don't require a rocket science IQ. there are also programs designed for those that qualify (low intellect etc). the jr colleges by me both have them. going to college is not always about brain power. some of us play in paint and canvas for 4 yrs ;)

    Parent
    she had successfully completed (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 03:23:26 PM EST
    she had successfully completed a certified nursing assistant program at a local community college.


    Parent
    Not to knock (none / 0) (#52)
    by Zorba on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:26:04 PM EST
    nursing assistants,they work very hard, but the course work for that is not exactly like getting a degree in astrophysics from MIT.

    Parent
    More of a work skills program (none / 0) (#54)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:32:44 PM EST
    looks like in Ca, you can get the training through adult ed centers etc

    my niece completed the same type of program

    Parent

    At our local (none / 0) (#55)
    by Zorba on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 05:56:23 PM EST
    community college, the CNA program is one semester long.  It is a non-credit program.  It qualifies students to apply for CNA status with the state Board of Nursing.

    Parent
    I'm pretty sure no one is accusing her of being (none / 0) (#58)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 09:01:09 PM EST
    an astrophysicist.

    Parent
    or a rocket surgeon. (1.00 / 0) (#60)
    by me only on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 09:29:43 PM EST
    unfortunately the point is lost on many of the commenters that the criteria for execution is not genius, but rather anything other than mentally retarded.

    Parent
    Read the Case (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:50:30 PM EST
    She was setup and is mentally ill. None of that was admissible.

    But your blood lust, is noted. I am not expecting you to change your fantasy life.

    Parent

    Not even John Grisham (none / 0) (#19)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:57:24 PM EST
    said she was set up.

    The ONLY reasonable point is that the shooterS got Life and she got death, which i agree.

    All three should have gotten the death penalty.

    Fantasy life? As in agreeing with what actually happened in the real world? I am sure you dreamt of "rescuing" murderers from their plight. Who is in fantasy now?

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:01:01 PM EST
    Your love of murder is well known here at TL. I am certain that when you get to play executioner you do it as slowly and painfully as possible.

    Parent
    What? (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by nyrias on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 02:08:04 PM EST
    no retort on my facts and argument?

    The best you can come up with is calling me names?

    I guess same applies to you. It is well known that you are on the side of violent criminals and would love nothing but to let them roam free and pamper them.

    And once again, good news that the country is not on your side.

    Parent

    So, upon further googling: (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 01:23:19 PM EST
    1. She took the IQ tests as part of her trial procedure. Do you think she would have any reason to try to purposely do poorly on the tests?

    2. She completed HS AND a year of college.


    Supreme Court Rejects Stay in Teresa Lewis Execution | 72 comments (72 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment