Alabama recent­ly set an exe­cu­tion date for Thomas Arthur (pic­tured), who was con­vict­ed of a mur­der that took place 30 years ago. Arthur has always main­tained his inno­cence, but has been denied access to DNA evi­dence that might lead to a dif­fer­ent ver­dict. As Andrew Cohen point­ed out in an inves­tiga­tive piece in The Atlantic, Arthur is sched­uled for exe­cu­tion on March 29, despite the con­fes­sion of Bobby Ray Gilbert to the crime for which Arthur is fac­ing exe­cu­tion. There was no phys­i­cal evi­dence that linked Arthur to the mur­der, and his sen­tence was secured almost entire­ly by the tes­ti­mo­ny of the victim’s wife, Judy Wicker. At first, Wicker told the author­i­ties that Arthur was not involved in the crime, but when she was con­vict­ed for hir­ing some­one to mur­der her hus­band, she arranged a deal with the pros­e­cu­tion. In exchange for a rec­om­men­da­tion of ear­ly release from prison, she changed her orig­i­nal tes­ti­mo­ny and impli­cat­ed Arthur. Since then, Gilbert has tes­ti­fied under oath to the mur­der. Gilbert said he had an affair with Wicker and soon agreed to kill her hus­band. State courts, how­ev­er, have ruled that Gilbert’s con­fes­sion was not cred­i­ble, and have opposed DNA test­ing on an item recov­ered from the crime scene that could iden­ti­fy who was actu­al­ly involved in the crime. Arthur’s attor­neys have agreed to pay for the DNA testing.

(A. Cohen, Another Death Row Debacle: The Case Against Thomas Arthur,” The Atlantic, February 27, 2012; A. Rosenthal, Death Penalty Death Watch: Is Alabama About to Execute an Innocent Man?” New York Times, February 27, 2012). See Innocence.

Citation Guide