Enlarge image
Holman Prison in Alabama: This is where Matthew Reeves was executed
Photo: Jay Reeves/AP
The US state of Alabama on Thursday executed a mentally disabled convicted murderer by lethal injection following a decision by the US Supreme Court.
Attorneys for convict Matthew Reeves, 43, had tried to prevent the execution, arguing that Reeves had been denied the opportunity to die by another - untried but potentially less painful - method of execution.
In 2018, death row inmates in Alabama could choose to be executed by lethal injection or nitrogen asphyxiation.
You should make your request clear on a form.
However, Reeves did not fill out the form.
His lawyers pointed out that Reeves was mentally challenged and had dyslexia.
He would therefore have needed help to understand the form, the lawyers argued.
A murder for $360
First, a judge had ruled that Reeves could therefore only be executed by asphyxiation with nitrogen.
On Wednesday, an appeals court confirmed the decision – the state of Alabama therefore went to the Supreme Court. On Thursday, it rejected the decision of the other courts – the man could also be executed by lethal injection.
In 1996, Reeves ambushed and killed a man who had taken him and several other men in his car.
Reeves, then 18, shot the man with a shotgun and stole $360 from him.
He then went to a party where he danced and imitated the dying man's convulsions.
One person testified that Reeves' hands were still covered with blood when he was at the party.
No unanimous Supreme Court decision
Reeves' attorneys criticized the decision, which the court failed to reason.
"The extraordinary authority of the Supreme Court should be used to protect its citizens and not deprive them of their rights without further explanation," they said.
The decision was not unanimous: only five of the nine judges agreed.
Judge Amy Coney Barrett said she would deny the state's request.
And three other judges were of the opinion that the execution should not take place.
In October, the court had ruled the same in a similar case: the lawyers for a man with an IQ of around 70 had argued the same way as Reeves' lawyers: the man did not understand that he could have chosen how he wanted to be executed.
In this case, too, the Supreme Court ruled that the man could be executed by lethal injection.
has/AP