Missouri Supreme Court Upholds Execution of Marcellus Williams \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ Marcellus Williams, convicted of the 1998 murder of Lisha Gayle, is set to be executed in Missouri despite appeals and clemency requests. Missouri Governor Mike Parson and the state’s Supreme Court rejected efforts to halt the execution, while Williams’ attorneys argue procedural errors and questions about DNA evidence cast doubt on his guilt. His case remains before the U.S. Supreme Court for a final appeal.
Marcellus Williams Execution: Quick Looks
- Marcellus Williams is scheduled for execution for the 1998 murder of Lisha Gayle in Missouri.
- Missouri Gov. Mike Parson denied clemency, while the state Supreme Court rejected appeals.
- Questions remain about racial bias in jury selection and mishandling of DNA evidence.
- St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell opposes the execution, citing doubts about Williams’ guilt.
- Williams has faced execution twice before, with stays granted in 2015 and 2017 for DNA testing.
- Williams’ case is supported by the Midwest Innocence Project, which argues he is innocent.
- The U.S. Supreme Court remains a final avenue for appeal.
Deep Look:
Marcellus Williams, a Missouri man convicted of the 1998 murder of Lisha Gayle, is facing execution on Tuesday at 6 p.m. after suffering significant legal setbacks. Despite claims of innocence and concerns over racial bias and evidence handling, Missouri Governor Mike Parson and the state’s top court rejected requests to halt his execution.
Williams, 55, was sentenced to death for the brutal killing of Gayle, a social worker and former journalist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. She was stabbed 43 times in her suburban St. Louis home during a burglary in August 1998. Prosecutors presented witness testimony and circumstantial evidence to secure Williams’ conviction, but questions about DNA evidence and procedural fairness have raised concerns in recent years.
On Monday, Missouri Governor Mike Parson, a Republican and former sheriff, denied Williams’ clemency request, which sought to commute his sentence to life in prison. In a statement, Parson said he found no reason to doubt Williams’ guilt, stating, “Nothing from the real facts of this case have led me to believe in Mr. Williams’ innocence.” This marks the latest in a series of legal blows for Williams, who has long maintained his innocence.
Simultaneously, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Williams’ legal team, which argued that the trial prosecutor engaged in racial bias by improperly excluding a Black juror. The court’s unanimous decision, authored by Judge Zel Fischer, dismissed these arguments, stating that after nearly 25 years of litigation, “there is no credible evidence of actual innocence or any showing of a constitutional error undermining confidence in the original judgment.”
Attorneys for Williams had argued that racial bias and improper handling of the murder weapon tainted his trial. While Williams’ claims of innocence were not presented in his latest state court appeal, his legal team focused on procedural issues, particularly the exclusion of a Black juror and the alleged mishandling of key evidence, such as the butcher knife used in the murder.
The appeal to halt the execution now lies before the U.S. Supreme Court, offering Williams a last hope to avoid execution. St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell, who has expressed doubts about Williams’ guilt, plans to support the appeal, emphasizing the serious questions surrounding the case. “Even for those who disagree on the death penalty, when there is a shadow of a doubt of any defendant’s guilt, the irreversible punishment of execution should not be an option,” Bell said.
Williams’ case has gained national attention, particularly because of the involvement of the Midwest Innocence Project, which has championed his cause. Tricia Bushnell, a lawyer with the organization, described the situation as a miscarriage of justice, stating, “Missouri is poised to execute an innocent man, an outcome that calls into question the legitimacy of the entire criminal justice system.”
The path to Williams’ scheduled execution has been long and fraught with legal battles. This marks the third time Williams has faced imminent execution. In January 2015, just days before his scheduled death, the Missouri Supreme Court granted a stay to allow for additional DNA testing. The next scheduled execution, in August 2017, was blocked by then-Governor Eric Greitens, a Republican, who appointed a panel of retired judges to re-examine the case. However, that panel never reached a conclusion.
The main point of contention in Williams’ defense has centered on DNA evidence—or the lack thereof. During the original trial, no physical evidence, including DNA, directly tied Williams to the crime scene. In fact, DNA found on the murder weapon did not match Williams, which has fueled the defense’s argument that the conviction was based on weak circumstantial evidence and unreliable testimony. For example, a jailhouse informant claimed that Williams confessed to the killing while they shared a cell, a common but controversial type of testimony in criminal cases.
Further complicating the case, new DNA testing results, which were supposed to be presented at a hearing in August 2023, were compromised. Just days before the scheduled hearing, it was revealed that the knife used in the murder had been contaminated by members of the prosecutor’s office, who handled the weapon without gloves before the original trial. With the DNA evidence spoiled, attorneys for the Midwest Innocence Project and the prosecutor’s office reached a deal in which Williams would enter a no-contest plea in exchange for life in prison without parole. The agreement was supported by the victim’s family and approved by Judge Bruce Hilton.
However, under pressure from Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, the Missouri Supreme Court blocked the agreement, ordering an evidentiary hearing instead. At that hearing, the prosecutor from the 2001 trial defended the fairness of the original jury selection, despite the fact that only one Black juror was seated. The prosecutor, Kevin Larner, justified striking a Black juror by stating that the man resembled Williams too closely, an argument that Williams’ attorneys claim demonstrated racial bias. Ultimately, Judge Hilton upheld the original conviction and sentence, a decision affirmed by the Missouri Supreme Court on Monday.
Lisha Gayle, the victim, had left her career in journalism to work as a social worker in St. Louis, helping underprivileged communities. On the day of the murder, prosecutors said Williams broke into Gayle’s home, stole her purse and her husband’s laptop, and fled the scene. His girlfriend later testified that she saw the stolen items in Williams’ car.
If the execution proceeds as scheduled, it will mark Missouri’s third execution in 2023 and the 100th since the state resumed executions in 1989. Despite the mounting legal challenges, Williams’ time is running out as his case awaits the final decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.
