National
Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty
Kia Johnson (TX) - June 11, 2003
The state of Texas is scheduled to execute Kia
Johnson June 11 for the murder of William Rains in San Antonio. Johnson, a
black man, allegedly shot Rains, a white man, while robbing a convenience
store on Oct. 29, 1993. As racial discrimination continues to plague the
death penalty process, this is yet another case with the jackpot
combination: black defendant, white victim.
A surveillance camera in the convenience store
captured the murder on tape; the footage showed a man enter the store, put
his hands on the counter, and then proceed to shoot the clerk in the
abdomen with a pistol. After it ran on local television, two people came
forward to identify Johnson on the tape and a third to link him to the
shooting; with three witnesses and a videotape, the state began building
its case against him.
As with many similar investigations, the facts of
the Rains murder turned out to be much more complicated than they
initially appeared. The two people who identified Johnson as the man on
the surveillance tape had ulterior motives and very little credibility:
one was his common-law wife’s uncle, who openly admitted that he could not
stand Johnson, and the other was a drug addict who had not seen Johnson in
15 years. The footage in the film was not clear at all, and the
fingerprints investigators took from the counter – which the tape showed
the offender touch – did not match Johnson’s fingerprints. The third
witness for the prosecution, who claimed she was with Johnson before the
shooting, was a longtime jailhouse informant; she had already been in
prison three times and had previously testified in exchange for reduced
sentences.
Johnson’s court-appointed defense attorney, who
apparently met with his client once before the trial, provided grossly
ineffective legal representation, most noticeably during the penalty phase
of the trial. In an egregious and severely consequential error, he called
Julian Rains, the victim’s father, to testify; Rains bluntly said: “I want
the guilty person punished…because I don't think my son could rest until
his murderer is taken care of.” The courts refused to accept Johnson’s
ineffective assistance argument on appeal, claiming that under the
circumstances, that could be considered a sound trial strategy.
In his appeal to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals in 2002, Johnson argued that his defense counsel’s errors in the
sentencing phase led the jury to settle on the death penalty, rather than
consider the issue of “residual doubt” concerning his guilt or innocence.
This case, now nearing a very serious execution date, represents an
inevitable nightmare of the capital punishment process: the state is
preparing to execute a possibly innocent man who stood trial with poor
legal representation.
Johnson has also argued that he should not be
executed because he is mentally retarded. In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court
banned the execution of people with mental retardation in Atkins v.
Virginia. However, the Texas legislature has not yet passed laws to come
into compliance with the ruling, and therefore the state does not have
guidelines by which to evaluate Atkins claims. Johnson scored within the
range of mental retardation on an IQ test in 1997, and two medical experts
have supported his claim.
Johnson has four children and countless friends and
supporters; his execution, if carried out, will only create a second set
of victims and perpetuate the cycle of violence in Texas. Please write
Gov. Rick Perry and request a stay for Kia Johnson and a re-evaluation of
the death penalty system in Texas.
|