From WLKY’s “Supreme Court Rejects Shawn Windsor Case“:
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case of a Kentucky death row inmate who wanted to hasten his execution.
The high court’s decision on Monday does not mean that 47-year-old Shawn William Windsor (right) will be immediately executed.Windsor pleaded guilty in 2006 to killing his estranged wife and son [Betty Jean Windsor Corey Windsor] in Louisville and asked for a death sentence.
Kentucky is under an injunction barring executions unrelated to Windsor’s case. Also, the state lacks a supply of sodium thiopental, a key drug used in a lethal injection.
The decision came in an appeal over whether Windsor could fire his attorneys and waive his appeals.
A few points:
- Windsor wants to be executed. So wouldn’t life in jail without the possibility of parole be a harsher sentence for him?
- For Windsor’s appeal to get all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, Kentucky forked over a lot of money for legal fees for both the prosecutors and public defenders. A sentence of life in jail without parole would’ve saved Kentuckians a lot of money (this case is a great example of how the death penalty is more costly that life sentences).
- The man wants to be killed: clearly the possibility of execution was not a deterrent.
- If Kentucky can’t even execute someone who “wanted to hasten his execution,” what’s the likelihood of it being able to do so anytime soon for death row inmates who fight their sentences? Murder victims’ family members deserve better than to be strung along by Kentucky with sentences the state can’t carry out. Better to give a sentence of life in jail without the possibility of parole, which starts immediately
Photo: Courtesy Kentucky Department of Corrections