In today's episode, Eva and I discuss Glossip v. Oklahoma. The case is about Richard Glossip who has been sentenced to the death penalty despite the prosecution hiding information about a key witness' mental health and that same witness admitting that he lied on the stand. We dive into the ethical implications of what will happen if the Supreme Court decides to uphold Glossip's sentence. Here are the sources we used:
- https://www.oyez.org/cases/2024/22-7466
- https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/04/opinion/courts-execution-mistakes.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
- https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-7466/308603/20240429163200162_22-7466%20ts.pdf
- https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/clemency
- https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/373/83/
- https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule
- https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-7466/270450/20230705170639604_GlossipRes%20MAIN%20%20E%20FILE%20Jul%205.pdf
- https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-7955

Ver todos los episodios