Subscriber Services
Subscriber Services
Weather
Complete Forecast
Search  Recent News  Archives  Web   for    




   • Front page
   • Metro
   • Sports

Wednesday, Sep 28, 2005
Breaking News  XML
  email this    print this    reprint or license this   
Posted on Wed, Sep. 28, 2005

U.S. Supreme Court to hear S.C. death penalty case


Associated Press

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of a death row inmate from York County who says he hasn't been allowed to present evidence another man committed the crime that sent him to death row.

Bobby Lee Holmes, 33, has been convicted twice of killing and raping 86-year-old Mary Stewart of York in December 1989.

But in those trials, the juries did not hear evidence about a man who Holmes' attorney says has bragged about raping Stewart for years.

In legal circles, the issue is called third-party guilt. It's where a defendant wants to use evidence that someone else committed the crime.

If the U.S. Supreme Court rules in Holmes' favor, he would get a new trial and the decision could change the South Carolina standard for admitting third-party evidence.

"If a jury is going to decide if a guy gets put to death or not, the least we can give them is all the information," said Holmes' attorney, Bill Nettles.

But prosecutor Tommy Pope, who sent Holmes to death row, said the evidence should have to rise to a certain level of credibility before a judge lets it in or it could unfairly confuse a jury.

In the Holmes case, his attorney wants to produce evidence that 37-year-old Jimmy McCaw White told four people he raped Stewart.

In a hearing before Holmes trial, White denied those allegations. Also DNA from the victim and fibers from her nightgown were found on Holmes' underwear and a mixture of blood from Holmes and the victim was found on Holmes' tank top, according to court documents.

"Jimmy McCaw White willingly submitted to a DNA test, and his DNA is nowhere to be found in the evidence," Pope said.

Nettles said law enforcement officials should have at least questioned White, but didn't because "they might have found out he was linked to the crime, and then they would have a mess on their hands."

"It's in their best interest to look at who they've got charged and refuse to look at anybody else," Nettles said. "That's not how investigations are supposed to be done."


Information from: The State, http://www.thestate.com/

  email this    print this    reprint or license this