Richard Glossip released after nearly three decades on death row

May 20

We are pleased to report the release on bail of Richard Glossip for whom we have campaigned for many years. His case is a long and tortuous one and he has been served ‘last meals’ on three occasions. He has been on death row for 27 years. In the endless series of trials and appeals it seems to be clear that the prosecution case was always weak. The crime was the murder of Barry van Treese in 1997 and Glossip was alleged to be the killer.

The prosecution allowed its key witness, Justin Sneed, to provide false testimony about his mental health and medical treatment. The new evidence showed that Sneed was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and prescribed lithium, facts that were withheld from the defence. At trial, Sneed falsely claimed he was never treated by a psychiatrist and received lithium mistakenly. This falsehood was material because Sneed’s testimony was the only direct evidence implicating Glossip, and impeachment of his credibility could have influenced the jury’s decision. The prosecution had prior knowledge of Sneed’s mental health treatment and still failed to correct the misstatement when it was made to the jury.

Correcting this false testimony would likely have changed the jury’s assessment of Sneed’s reliability. The prosecution is alleged to excluded exculpatory evidence, interfered with witness testimony, and allowed destruction of key physical evidence. Given these cumulative errors and their impact on the fairness of the trial, Glossip is entitled to a new trial. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals’ rejection of the attorney general’s confession of error was based on a misapplication of federal law.

Free for now

Richard Glossip walked out of an Oklahoma County jail Thursday with his wife, free on bond for the first time since his 1997 arrest, after a judge set his release terms ahead of a retrial the U.S. Supreme Court ordered last year. As Hannah Ziegler reported for the New York Times, Judge Natalie Mai set Glossip’s bond at $500,000, requiring an electronic monitoring device and prohibiting contact with witnesses or travel outside Oklahoma. A group of supporters helped raise the bond money.

Glossip was convicted in 1998 and again in 2004 of arranging the murder of his employer, Barry Van Treese, through motel handyman Justin Sneed. The state set execution dates for him nine times. Two independent investigations later found that critical evidence had been withheld and that Sneed’s testimony, the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case, was faulty.

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who had previously asked the Supreme Court to throw out Glossip’s conviction, said he would retry the case but would not again seek the death penalty. Glossip’s attorney Donald Knight said the bond ruling was unexpected and marked a step forward after what he called a decades-long nightmare.

Judge Mai wrote that a new trial free of error would give all parties and Oklahoma citizens the closure they deserve. Knight said the court’s decision had rejected the state’s claim of a strong case for guilt. Glossip told reporters outside the jail Thursday that it was overwhelming but amazing.

The point here is that the case was weak and there are serious doubts about his guilt. Had he been executed in one of the three previous occasions there would be no coming back. It could not be undone.

Sources: MSN, Oklahoma Watch, The Oklahoman. Picture NBC.

---

• Execution spree continues in Florida
• Vigil following a horrific week
• Podcast Episode: Rights Trade And Sustainability
• Government signs trade deal
• People in the Park

US Supreme Court rules that prosecutors violated ethical responsibilities

February 2025

The case of Richard Glossip in Oklahoma raises a number of interesting issues concerning the death penalty in the USA and in this case, the state of Oklahoma. In a 5-3 decision in Glossip v. Oklahoma issued on 25 February, the Supreme Court judges ruled that the prosecutors had ‘violated their duty to correct false testimony’. The prosecutors had also ‘suppressed material evidence concerning their star witness, Justin Sneed’ who actually committed the murder.

The case involved the murder in 1997 of Barry van Treese the owner of a motel. Sneed confessed to the killing and agreed a plea bargain claiming that Glossip had instructed him to carry out the murder. This saved him from execution. There are a number of factors which has made this a case attracting international attention.

There was very little corroboration evidence apart from the testimony of Sneed. Sneed’s mental state was not revealed to the defence (defense) team, nor was his untrustworthiness or that he had lied to the police. Glossip’s legal team has discovered that Sneed had discussed recanting his testimony before the original trial and since. This had not been revealed to them. Another not unusual factor is the doubtful quality of his defence counsel.

There is not doubt that Glossip has suffered much in the 27 years. He has had no less than nine execution dates and has eaten three ‘last meals’.

It is being said that this case will not have wider effects because so many elements are unusual. But it does highlight the problem of the death penalty. Had any one of the nine actually taken place, there would have been no chance of an appeal. If the criminal system has people willing to withhold evidence, then any chance of a fair trial is unlikely. It is also unwise to convict someone of the ultimate legal penalty without certainty which must mean at the very least, corroborative and trustworthy evidence. A defendant must also have first class attorneys to defend him. The testimony of an unreliable witness should be treated with great caution.

A new trial has been ordered.

Sources:

World Campaign Against the Death Penalty; BBC, The Hill.