In addition:
After his appeals started, the case took an unusual turn. His attorneys went to the Arlington courthouse to examine his trial evidence -- and discovered that nearly every piece had been destroyed. His attorneys have argued that this is especially notable because earlier DNA results were inconclusive and more sophisticated tests now exist.
In an interesting twist, Lovitt's lawyer is Kenneth W. Starr, 58, who "served in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, a man who grew up in a conservative religious home in Texas and thought the death penalty had its place." And in another interesting twist, Virginia is "second to Texas in its number of executions since 1976 - -- the year the Supreme Court permitted states to resume the death penalty -- and where its DNA laboratory is scrutinized closely because of errors in its analysis in another death penalty case."
So, here's the bottom line. Robin Lovitt may or may not be guilty of murder. He therefore may or may not be eligible for the Virginia death penalty. Obviously, there is sufficient doubt -- possibly even the legal standard of "reasonable doubt" -- regarding Lovitt's guilt that the Supreme Court has now issued a stay of execution. Given all this, wouldn't it be eminently reasonable to put Robin Lovitt behind bars for the rest of his life without any possiblity of parole, but to be VERY cautious about executing him given the destruction of critical evidence and other irregularities in his case?
More broadly, what the Lovitt case drives home for me is the finality of the death penalty, and the necessity of being 100% certain before giving the green light for carrying out this ultimate penalty. The problem is, there are numerous cases like Robin Lovitt's, where there is NOT 100% certainty. And that's exactly why I find it disturbing that the Jerry Kilgores of the world are so eager to expand the death penalty, even to accomplices who didn't actually "pull the trigger."
What I wonder is this: don't cases like Robin Lovitt's give the Jerry Kilgores of the world even a moment's pause regarding that stance? Doesn't the thought of executing a possibly innocent person bother these people even a little bit? And isn't the fact that Virginia is already second in the nation in executions, behind George W. Bush's Texas, sufficient to create a moment of hesitation in even the hardest heart? Those are just a few questions I'd love to hear answered - possibly even in a public debate (what a concept!) - by the Jerry Kilgores of this world. But I'm certainly not holding my breath, that's for damn sure.