home

Teresa Lewis Executed in Virginia

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 09:02:50 PM EST
Tags: Teresa Lewis (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Teresa Lewis was pronounced dead at 9:13 pm. Her last supper: fried chicken, peas and Dr. Pepper.

Teresa Lewis didn't pull the trigger. She confessed, pleaded guilty and cooperated with authorities. She had an IQ of 70, right on the border of mental retardation. She had no prior criminal record, and no prior history of violence. The triggermen in the murder got life without parole. Yet she was executed -- the first first female sentenced to death in Virginia since 1912.

The next time you hear a politician proclaim they are pro life, ask them to prove it by promising to vote to end the death penalty.

R.I.P: Our evolving standards of decency.

< Thursday Afternoon Open Thread | Thursday Night Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Teresa Lewis Executed in Virginia | 49 comments (49 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Wow (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by glanton on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 09:34:10 PM EST
    Each execution cheapens our common humanity that much moe.

    more (none / 0) (#2)
    by glanton on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 09:34:24 PM EST


    Parent
    Interesting the deceased appears to (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:01:48 PM EST
    be Caucasian.  Newspaper reports state she purchased the weapons used to kill her husband and stepson, and if each of these men died, she stood to benefit from a large life insurance policy.  Who was the Supreme Court Justice who denied her writ for stay?  

    Ruth Bader Ginsberg (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:09:53 PM EST


    Parent
    Wrong, Oculus (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:31:35 PM EST
    The full Court yesterday heard and denied the final application for a stay.  Justices Ginsburg [note correct spelling] and Sotomayor voted to grant her a stay of execution.  Beautifully written post, by the way, TL.

    Parent
    Sorry. I read too quickly. Doesn't (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:34:50 PM EST
    a request to stay execution first go to a single Supreme Court Justice.  Who was that?  

    Parent
    An application for stay must first be presented (none / 0) (#10)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:48:28 PM EST
    to the Circuit Justice for the Circuit within which the case arose.  For the Fourth Circuit, which encompasses Virginia, that is Chief Justice Roberts at this time (as stated on the docket that I linked for you, had you clicked the link).  Rather than rule on the stay application, Roberts referred it to the full Court for decision.  Had he simply denied it, she could then have reapplied to any Justice of her choice -- perhaps to R.B. Ginsburg.  Whether Ginsburg would have granted a stay or referred it to the full Court at that point (to avoid an unseemly sequence of stays and vacaturs of stay, which the state could have then sought) is a matter of speculation.

    Parent
    I'm glad you corrected the info (1.00 / 2) (#12)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:59:10 PM EST
    but your rudeness towards oculus is over the top. Get over yourself.

    Parent
    No excuse for my sloppiness though. (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:00:42 PM EST
    I appreciate Peter G's expertise, which is usually delivered in a straightforward manner.

    Parent
    Indeed (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:10:53 PM EST
    I was about to type how much I valued his very clear and concise contributions on these questions.

    Parent
    Curious what you found "over the top" (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:14:28 PM EST
    rude, Shoe.  Noting the correct spelling of Justice Ginsburg's name?  I think that's part of giving her the respect she is due.  Or suggesting that when someone goes to the trouble of researching and providing a link -- two links, actually -- that someone else who professes an interest in the matter might want to check it out for him/herself?  I'm never ad hominem and almost never snarky here, even with the trolls, like so many posters.  Frankly, I could have been more patient, but I don't see any rudeness.

    Parent
    It's all fine. BTD doesn't appreciate (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:17:19 PM EST
    my skipping his links either!

    Parent
    With respect (none / 0) (#14)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:10:05 PM EST
    I think your reaction is over the top.  "Had you clicked the link" is a bit testy, since Oculus asked him a question she could have answered for herself had she, um, clicked the link he took the trouble to provide, but it's hardly "over the top."

    Parent
    Goodnight. (1.00 / 1) (#17)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:15:20 PM EST


    Parent
    What are the odds SCOTUS would grant (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:56:48 PM EST
    a stay solely on the grounds of disproportionate sentences as to the three defendants?  

    Parent
    A stay indicates that the Justice believes (none / 0) (#19)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 11:30:15 PM EST
    there's a reasonable chance that four Justices will vote to hear the case on the merits.  That depends on so many factors and circumstances in the facts and history of a given case that there's no way to answer your question.  I don't even know on what grounds the final stay was sought. It would have to be some new issue that hadn't been decided in the case long since.  The long shots get longer and longer in these cases after all those years.  My attitude toward the death penalty is heavily influenced by the fact that I had a client who was on death row in PA for over 20 years in a horrible case, lots of circumstantial evidence against him, had been through four or more rounds of appeals, and turned out, through advanced DNA testing, to be innocent. At various points along the way, we could easily have lost him.

    Parent
    Your client is very fortunate you were (3.67 / 3) (#20)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:12:49 AM EST
    advocating on his behalf.  

    Parent
    Thanks very much, Oculus (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 11:43:33 AM EST
    Defending a capital case, as court-appointed counsel on post-conviction habeas corpus, was an amazing experience.  My client wrote quite a good book about it, too, called "7 Days to Live," if you can find a copy.  It was published only in the U.K., and is now rare and expensive as a used book.  (And if I was too abrupt with you last night, I do apologize.)

    Parent
    Apology accepted. You were (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:25:09 PM EST
    righteously miffed at my stupid errors.

    Parent
    Wow. (none / 0) (#5)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:30:32 PM EST
    Stunned beyond words with this situation.

    Parent
    F*ck (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:31:40 PM EST
    I am in mourning. This is a tragedy.

    And war too? (none / 0) (#8)
    by diogenes on Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 10:32:29 PM EST
    "The next time you hear a politician proclaim they are pro life, ask them to prove it by promising to vote to end the death penalty."
    Does this mean that you also oppose the use of deadly force by people like policemen and soldiers?

    Do you think we live in a country... (none / 0) (#22)
    by NealB on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:13:12 AM EST
    ...where the use of deadly force by policemen and soldiers needs to be defended?

    I oppose the use of deadly force by policemen and soldiers. Is there an instance where deadly force is longer required?

    Parent

    I'm not resigned to accepting capitol punishment (none / 0) (#21)
    by NealB on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:55:44 AM EST
    I agree with Senator Feingold:

    "I oppose the death penalty because it is inconsistent with basic American principles of justice, liberty, and equality."

    Feingold is not alone in the Democratic caucus of the US Senate, of course. Most Democrats are aligned against the death penalty.

    Last time I can remember the death penalty was an issue in a national, presidential election was 1988. 1988. (No offense to Clinton fans here, but both Bill and Hillary are pro-death penalty.) It's been twenty-two years since it was a national issue. Now, the death penalty has become status quo.

    Lady Liberty... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 08:40:32 AM EST
    didn't turn green due the elements, she turned green due to her tears.

    We just keep lettin' the old girl down.

    "Is everybody so ashamed for lettin' it all slide?
    Is everybody so afraid?
    Mr. Dylan's Hard Rain was fair warnin'"

    - Ryan Bingham

    Good riddance (none / 0) (#27)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 11:28:18 AM EST
    On the night before Halloween in 2002, after she prayed with her husband, Lewis got out of bed, unlocked the door to their mobile home and put the couple's pit bull in a bedroom so the animal wouldn't interfere. Shallenberger and Fuller came in and shot both men several times with the shotguns Lewis had bought for them.

    A $250,000 insurance policy was the motivation for hiring the killers that shot her husband and step son.  

    To me, in light of the fact her (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:27:22 PM EST
    co-conspirators (read hit men) did not receive the death penalty and her IQ, LWOP would have sufficed for her.  

    Parent
    IMO (none / 0) (#38)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:25:50 PM EST

    IMO, the person hiring the hit men should always get more than any of the underlings.

    Parent
    Of course (none / 0) (#43)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:29:16 PM EST
    because any man of the Right worth his salt knows that everyone has their price..

    Parent
    Plus, (none / 0) (#51)
    by nyrias on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 04:47:33 PM EST
    I have no problem if the shooters are getting the death penalty too.

    Parent
    So she had people killed (none / 0) (#35)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:20:06 PM EST
    in order to enhance her security: the same way we use the state to kill people to enhance ours.

    Parent
    She had an IQ of 70 (none / 0) (#31)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:37:26 PM EST
    She had an IQ of 70, right on the border of mental retardation.
    Actually, I believe the lowest result of the several IQ tests she took (all of them were administered post-arrest) was 72, not 70.

    All of the IQ tests were administered after she was arrested for the murders. ie., she had every reason to purposely try do poorly on the tests.

    And she also is a HS grad, had never failed a class, had earned a nursing assistant certification and had raised a child in addition for caring for her aged parents.

    I don't for a second suggest she's the brightest crayon in the box, but dumb people murder others just as dead as smart people.

    So (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:45:31 PM EST
    Had she, failed a couple of classes in HS, and tested 5 points lower you would be horrified about her execution?

    Parent
    It's pretty clear she had more than enough (none / 0) (#33)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 12:58:53 PM EST
    mental capacity to know that what she was doing was wrong.  

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#34)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:08:14 PM EST
    she was just one of those people who are overly concerned about others getting their stuff..

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#36)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:21:28 PM EST
    she was just one of those people who equate movies and books with real life?

    Parent
    The good ones distill (none / 0) (#41)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:27:11 PM EST
    real life quite well, in my experience.

    That's why people are still reading Crime and Punishment 150 years later..

    Parent

    Great book. (none / 0) (#45)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:38:42 PM EST
    Sounds like it should be included in the type of stuff that one should be able ensure stays in one's family when one dies...

    Parent
    to know "what she was doing was wrong" (none / 0) (#37)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:25:20 PM EST
    ... which helps address what question?  The standard you articulate, SU, is part of the test for an insanity defense.  But no one -- I repeat, NO ONE -- of those who have expressed concern here about Ms Lewis's execution has suggested that she was not legally guilty.  In fact, she pleaded guilty; there was not even a trial in this case.  It's all about a subjective balancing of aggravating factors (extended premeditation, two victims, financial motive, hired killer) against mitigating factors (very low intelligence, disparity of treatment of co-defendants, cooperation with the authorities upon arrest and after, guilty plea, lack of violent or criminal record, seeming past history of being subject to physical and/or sexual abuse.  Contrary to your suggestion, a simplistic, one factor analysis will not yield a just result.  YRMV.  Mine say, life not death.

    Parent
    The Supremes don't agree with you. (none / 0) (#42)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:28:28 PM EST
    I'm sure you are not alone.

    Parent
    Oh, I See (none / 0) (#40)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:26:25 PM EST
    May as well move the goalposts.

    The question was, based on your repeated argument that she cheated on her IQ test:

    Would you be horrified if she tested 5 point lower and had failed some classes in HS?

    Hard for anyone not to know that if they kill someone that person will be dead. But that was not my question.

    Parent

    If her actual IQ was in the 60's (none / 0) (#44)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:32:38 PM EST
    and she was mentally retarded I would agree with those who felt she should not have been executed.

    I hope you consider that a satisfactory answer to your question, your question being so insightful and important and all...

    Parent

    Hard To Keep Up With You (none / 0) (#47)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 03:25:13 PM EST
    but dumb people murder others just as dead as smart people.

    Yes, that is one of the problems with the death penalty.... it cannot be undone.  

    Parent

    Only you would refer to (none / 0) (#48)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 03:52:23 PM EST
    mentally retarded people as dumb. What a peach you are.

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 03:54:10 PM EST
    Your quote not mine:

    I don't for a second suggest she's the brightest crayon in the box, but dumb people murder others just as dead as smart people.


    Parent
    She's not mentally retarded, (none / 0) (#50)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 03:56:57 PM EST
    not even close, apparently...

    Parent
    Should have received LWOP (none / 0) (#39)
    by DancingOpossum on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 01:26:20 PM EST
    The death penalty is always wrong, period, for anyone, and every instance of it sickens and shames us--as does the attitude of the bloodlust gang. That said, I have no sympathy for Teresa Lewis, and I resent the implication that someone who is mildly mentally retarded (as a close family member of mine is) would incapable of knowing right from wrong, and especially of somehow not knowing that murder was wrong. That should not be a mitigating factor in deciding her guilt or her punishment, which should have been equal to that of her co-conspirators. No, she didn't pull the trigger but she was clearly in charge of the whole operation and she had two men murdered for money. She was not innocent. It's terrible that she received the death penalty, yes--but only because the punishment is terrible, not because she was some poor benighted misled victim.

    At least in CA, diminished capacity (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 02:46:54 PM EST
    is no longer a defense.  But, if, she was not guilty by reason of insanity, she shouldn't have been permitted to plead guilty.  Which, I assume, was part of the post conviction habeas case.  

    Parent
    Well argued ... (none / 0) (#52)
    by nyrias on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 04:52:55 PM EST
    about the point that being stupid is no excuse.

    And of course we differ in the OPINION that the death penalty is wrong.

    Parent

    Teresa Lewis Executed in Virginia | 49 comments (49 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment