Tennessee man faces execution for killing his wife and her 2 sons, 3 years after surprise reprieve
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A Tennessee man who killed his wife and her two teenage sons was scheduled to be executed on Thursday morning, three years after he was saved by a last-minute reprieve .
Oscar Smith, 75, was scheduled to receive a lethal injection of the barbiturate pentobarbital at 10:10 a.m. Smith has always claimed to be innocent, and in an interview with The Associated Press recently, he primarily wanted to discuss the ways he felt the court system had failed him.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court: US Gun Makers Not Liable for Cartel Violence
In a unanimous blow to gun control advocacy groups, he Supreme Court shut down Mexicos $10 billion claim targeting U.S. gun makers in a cross-border lawsuit. Mexico originally filed the suit in 2021, arguing that U.S. gun companies were responsible for the weapons that fueled cartel violence. Mexico received support in its lawsuit from American gun control advocacy groups such as Everytown and March for our Lives Action Fund. The Supreme Court ruling, written by Justice Elena Kagan, found that the manufacturers alleged failure to exercise "reasonable care" does not meet the standard necessary to be found liable for "aiding and abetting" the sale of illegal firearms in Mexico. Mexico had asked the court for $10 billion in damages and additional court-imposed injunctive relief in the form of restrictions on manufacturers. According to a lawyer who spoke to RCP, siding with Mexico on the injunctive relief "would have likely severely prohibited the distribution of the manufacturers products" within the United States. A federal district court judge initially ruled that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protected the gun manufacturers from the suit. In 2024, the First Circuit Court of Appeals revitalized the lawsuit. In response, gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson brought the case to the Supreme Court. The PLCAA, signed into law in 2005 by President George W. Bush, shields gun manufacturers and dealers from liability when crimes are committed with their products. The law includes exceptions which Mexicos lawyers sought to invoke. The original suit by Mexico, which named multiple U.S.-based gun manufacturers as defendants, claimed that Mexicans "have been victimized by a deadly flood of military-style and other particularly lethal guns that flows from the U.S. across the border." It also argued that U.S. companies were negligent in their sales practices, claiming that the gun companies "are not accidental or unintentional players in this tragedy; they are deliberate and willing participants, reaping profits from the criminal market they knowingly supply." In response, lawyers for Smith & Wesson argued in a filing that the lawsuit "faults the defendants for producing common firearms" and for "failing to restrict the purchase of firearms by regular citizens." They made the case that "aiding and abetting criminal activity must involve something more than making products generally." Ultimately, the Supreme Court agreed with this reasoning. In reference to the injunctive relief that Mexico asked the court to grant, lawyers for Smith & Wesson asserted that the lawsuit was "inflicting costly and intrusive discovery at the hands of a foreign sovereign that is trying to bully the industry into adopting a host of gun-control measures that have been repeatedly rejected by American voters." According to some estimates, more than 250,000 firearms are smuggled from the United States into Mexico each year. In contrast, Mexico has one gun store and issues fewer than 50 new gun permits each year. The U.S. is the largest firearm exporter in the world, partly due to relaxed gun laws within the country. The unanimous decision marks the first ruling by the Supreme Court where the PLCAA is cited and could serve as precedent for protecting weapons manufacturers in future cases. The 9-0 ruling suggests strong judicial consensus on the limits of civil liability for gun manufacturers under federal law. It is seen as a win by gun rights activists, with the NRA arguing in their amicus brief on the case that "Mexico has extinguished its constitutional arms right and now seeks to extinguish Americas." Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson each issued concurring opinions, with Jackson writing that Mexicos lawsuit targeted industry-wide practices that Congress has chosen not to prohibit and Thomas arguing that violations of U.S. law must be established in court for the PLCAA exceptions to be valid. James Eustis is an intern at RealClearPolitics. He studies politics at Washington & Lee University.
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Jones Beach closed after fight breaks out during senior skip day, police say
Jones Beach was closed Thursday after police say several fights broke out during a senior skip day on Long Island. New York State Parks Police said crowds of high school students from Queens and Nassau County packed the beach for an unsanctioned cut day. Police said it started around 3 p.m. without any issues but escalated a few hours later. The beach was shut down, and the crowd was dispersed. At least one person was seen being taken into custody, but there was no word of any charges. Police said multiple agencies stayed on the scene to make sure the area was safe. No injuries were reported. The beach is expected to reopen for normal hours Friday, police said. Nearby in Long Beach, officials said they shut down the beach to prevent a multi-school party last week. The beach there will remain closed except for weekends and holidays until school lets out later this month. Thousands of teens descended on Long Beach around this time last year, resulting in gunfire with one person shot and two arrested. Officials said they have been monitoring social media to track plans for any potential gatherings.
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
A West Virginia prosecutor is warning women that a miscarriage could lead to criminal charges
Amid a constantly changing reproductive landscape, one West Virginia prosecutor is warning people who have miscarriages in his state that they could get in trouble with the law. Raleigh County Prosecuting Attorney Tom Truman says that although he personally wouldn't prosecute someone for a miscarriage, he made the suggestion out of an abundance of caution after hearing from other prosecutors. Truman even suggests people might want to let local law enforcement know if they've have a miscarriage. Several reproductive law experts say people around the country have, indeed, faced charges related to miscarriages — but they still wouldn't recommend reaching out to law enforcement. Truman says the idea first came up during a chat with other West Virginia prosecutors at a conference several years ago, and it's been been an ongoing conversation since. The initial conversation was theoretical, since at the time, women in the US still had the constitutional right to an abortion under Roe v. Wade. But some of the prosecutors believed they could charge a person using state laws related to the disposal of human remains. 'I thought these guys were just chewing on a Dreamsicle,' Truman said. But, he added, West Virginia's legal statutes include definitions that are 'pretty broad-ranging.' The way some prosecutors may interpret the law means people who miscarry could face criminal charges, including felonies, he said. 'It's a different world now, and there's a lot of discretion that prosecutors have, and some of them have agendas where they would like to make you an example,' Truman told CNN. 'What's changed is, Roe isn't there anymore, and so that may embolden prosecutors in some cases,' he said. 'I'm just trying to say, 'be careful.' ' Early pregnancy loss is common, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, It happens in about 10 of 100 known pregnancies, often because the embryo isn't developing properly. And some reproductive law experts say it's probably not a good idea to call the police when it happens. 'It's always a mistake to invite law enforcement into your reproductive life,' said Kim Mutcherson, a professor of law at Rutgers Law School who specializes in reproductive justice. Calling police could prompt an unwanted investigation, she says. 'If they then decide, 'no, it actually wasn't a miscarriage, this was somebody who took pills,' or whatever sort of thing that they want to conjure up, then all of a sudden it goes from 'here's this poor woman who had a miscarriage' to 'here's a person who we're going to start to prosecute,' ' Mutcherson said. 'I understand the idea that caution is better than being caught up in something that you weren't anticipating, but it is difficult for me to imagine any circumstance in which I would think it was safe for someone who miscarried to call the police,' she added. Abortion is illegal in West Virginia, but there are exceptions in the case of a medical emergency or a nonviable pregnancy, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. Kulsoom Ijaz, senior policy counsel with Pregnancy Justice, a nonprofit focused on the civil and human rights of pregnant people, said she doesn't believe there is anything in West Virginia law that criminalizes miscarriage. 'I think the law is pretty clear,' she said. 'There's nothing in the law that says someone can be charged with a crime in connection to their pregnancy loss or their conduct during pregnancy, or for how they respond to that pregnancy loss or miscarriage or stillbirth.' The fractured landscape of reproductive rights that came about in the wake of the Dobbs decision, the US Supreme Court ruling that revoked the federal right to an abortion, has increased the risk that a pregnant person can face criminal prosecution for a variety of reasons, not just a miscarriage, according to a report from Ijaz's organization. Between June 2022 – when Dobbs was handed down – and June 2023, there were more than 200 cases in the US in which a pregnant person faced criminal charges for conduct associated with pregnancy, pregnancy loss or birth, according to Pregnancy Justice. The number is most likely an undercount, Ijaz said. In West Virginia, there were at least three cases related to pregnancy prosecutions. In one, the state's Supreme Court found that the state could not levy criminal child abuse charges against someone for their prenatal conduct, which included substance use during pregnancy. Even with the strict abortion ban in place, Ijaz said, 'there are still protections for pregnant people.' In states like Alabama that have fetal personhood laws that give fertilized eggs, embryos and a fetus the 'same rights as you and I,' Ijaz said, it's a little different. 'We've seen people get prosecuted and face decades of incarceration for substance use during pregnancy, because that fetus that they're carrying is seen as a child,' she said. Last year in Ohio, a woman who had a miscarriage at home was charged with a felony on the advice of the Warren City Prosecutor's Office, but a grand jury dismissed the case. Ijaz said that she doesn't think there is an appetite for these kind of cases among the public but that no matter where someone lives, inviting the law into their life right after a miscarriage is ill-advised. The legal landscape for reproductive justice 'seems to almost be changing on a daily basis' – and generally not in favorable ways for pregnant people, said Brittany Fonteno, CEO of the National Abortion Federation, a professional association for abortion providers. 'The laws, the rhetoric, the culture in which we are living in within the US has become so incredibly hostile to people who experience pregnancy,' she said. 'I think that the intersection of health care and criminalization is an incredibly dangerous path,' Fonteno added. 'As a country, we should be supporting people and their ability to access the health care that they need, rather than conducting intrusive and traumatic investigations into their reproductive lives.' Fonteno recommends that people who experience pregnancy loss reach out to a qualified medical professional rather than law enforcement. 'While we are living in a very different country than we were pre-Dobbs, I believe still that this is an individual experience and a health care decision,' she said. 'Most providers believe that as well.' Mutcherson also says that the reproductive justice landscape in the US is 'scary' for people who are pregnant, who want to get pregnant or who have bad pregnancy outcomes. If there's any silver lining to the discussion about criminalizing miscarriage, she said, it's that it's good for people to know that such things can happen. 'Women have been criminalized for their pregnancies for decades, frankly, so to the extent that there is a wider and broader conversation about what it means to treat an embryo or a fetus as a person, and the ways in which that diminishes the personhood of somebody who was pregnant, that is in fact a valuable thing, right?' Mutcherson said. 'Maybe this is actually going to bring us to a better space.'
