-
Tips for becoming a good boxer - November 6, 2020
-
7 expert tips for making your hens night a memorable one - November 6, 2020
-
5 reasons to host your Christmas party on a cruise boat - November 6, 2020
-
What to do when you’re charged with a crime - November 6, 2020
-
Should you get one or multiple dogs? Here’s all you need to know - November 3, 2020
-
A Guide: How to Build Your Very Own Magic Mirror - February 14, 2019
-
Our Top Inspirational Baseball Stars - November 24, 2018
-
Five Tech Tools That Will Help You Turn Your Blog into a Business - November 24, 2018
-
How to Indulge on Vacation without Expanding Your Waist - November 9, 2018
-
5 Strategies for Businesses to Appeal to Today’s Increasingly Mobile-Crazed Customers - November 9, 2018
Defense for Dylann Roof argue that death penalty is unconstitutional
Attorneys for a white man accused of killing nine black parishioners in a racially motivated attack at a SC church a year ago argued that their client should not face the death penalty, asserting the punishment is unconstitutional. According to Roof’s lawyers, they are asking the judge to declare the death penalty to be unconstitutional for violating human rights.
Advertisement
The motion says such a ruling would permit Roof to enter a guilty plea and be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of release. Both the Federal government and the state of SC are seeking the death penalty for Roof, who is charged with hate crimes and scores of other counts stemming from the June 17, 2015, murders at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston. He is accused of killing nine black worshippers at a Bible study in the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Six states have abolished the death penalty since 2007, most recently Nebraska in 2015. The motions are typical for death penalty cases in which attorneys are tasked with exhausting all avenues in attempting to spare clients from the ultimate punishment.
Roof’s attorneys argued the Federal Death Penalty Act constitutes “unconstitutional punishment” and violates the Fifth and Eighth amendments.
“The nature of the alleged crime and the resulting harm compelled this decision”, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said in May about the decision to pursue the death penalty. Roof was captured shortly after the horrific killing in North Carolina, and charged with 33 federal offenses, including hate crimes.
Roof’s lawyers are forthright about the herculean feats necessary to prevail.
Roof’s lawyers are also challenging “death qualification” – this is the jury selection process where a jury willing to impose the death penalty is found. No date has been set for the federal trial.
During his trial, Roof once again caused outrage after the judge who arraigned his case, Charleston County Magistrate James Gosnell Jr. told the court that Roof’s family are also victims of the incident.
Advertisement
The defense said should pursuit of the death penalty be dropped, “Mr. Roof will withdraw this motion and plead guilty as charged to all counts in the indictment”.