Guest Blogger: Deborah W. Denno

It's IntLawGrrls' distinct pleasure today to welcome Dr. Deborah W. Denno (left) as a guest blogger.
The Arthur A. McGivney Professor of Law at Fordham University School of Law, Debby is a foremost expert on the law of capital punishment, an issue of global consequence that's often the subject of IntLawGrrls posts. For nearly 2 decades she has written on, and testified as an expert in state and federal courts about, the constitutionality of lethal injection and electrocution. This expertise is evident from a glance at her publications list, on which also may be found many studies of other issues relating to criminal law, criminal procedure, and social sciences and the law. Currently Debby is working on a book-length project analyzing the neuroscientific correlates of criminal intent and conduct; she already has published Biology and Violence: From Birth to Adulthood (1990). She was a member of the Drugs/Violence Task Force of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and in 2007 was selected by The National Law Journal as one of the “50 Most Influential Women Lawyers in America.”
Debby holds a B.A. from the University of Virginia, an M.A. from the University of Toronto, and a Ph.D. and J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, where she was the Managing Editor of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. She clerked for Anthony J. Scirica, now Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and also practiced at a law firm before entering academia. She has held visitorships at Columbia, Vanderbilt, Princeton, the University of London, and the London School of Economics.
In her guest post below, Debby recounts the story of a condemned teenager twice electrocuted by the State of Louisiana, and relates that mid-20th century case to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2008 judgment in Baze v. Rees, a case involving execution by lethal injection, in which she gave expert testimony.
The guest post is dedicated to a woman oft-noted on this blog, Susan B. Anthony (below right), about whom Debby says:

Anthony overcame early economic adversity and extraordinary sexism to propel women's suffrage into the United States by way of her intellect, activism, writing, and steel-strong courage.

Today Anthony joins the list of IntLawGrrls' transnational foremothers just below the "visiting from" map at right.

Heartfelt welcome!

The Case of Willie Francis: A Troubling & Inexcusable Precedent for Capital Punishment

(My thanks to IntLawGrrls for the opportunity to contribute this guest-post)

On May 3, 1946, in the small town of St. Martinville, Louisiana, Willie Francis (right), a black youth of seventeen years, sat in the state’s electric chair, strapped in, ready to die. Willie was just like many convicted murderers throughout the country awaiting their punishments – poor minority teenagers stuck in a criminal justice system offering few of the legal protections available today. Yet in a matter of minutes Willie would be plucked from the masses. He would survive the electrocution, taking him from the front of the execution line to front-page news. Time and again, Willie’s experience would be called a “miracle,” a “blessing from God,” or “divine intervention” by layperson and lawyer alike.
Willie’s life narrative – often framed by the themes of race, risk, and religion -- is presented in "When Willie Francis Died: The 'Disturbing' Story Behind One of the Eighth Amendment's Most Enduring Standards of Risk," the chapter that I contributed to Death Penalty Stories (John H. Blume & Jordan M. Steiker eds., 2009). My chapter begins with explorations of 1940s St. Martinville and Willie’s early childhood. These discussions are followed by examinations of:
► Willie’s alleged murder of Andrew Thomas, St. Martinville’s popular white pharmacist;
► Willie’s arrest and interrogation in connection with the murder; the deeply flawed trial that ended in Willie’s conviction; and
► the state’s failed first attempt to execute Willie using the electric chair.
The story includes the fruitless appeals to the Louisiana Supreme Court, the Louisiana Pardons Board, and the U.S. Supreme Court by Willie’s attorneys, Bertrand de Blanc and J. Skelly Wright, the latter of whom would go on to a renowned career on the federal bench. Then follows a chilling re-telling of Willie’s second electrocution, on May 9, 1947, which finally took his young life.
This chapter’s discussion of Willie’s life and death is based on correspondence, interviews, and accounts that have never been revealed elsewhere, as well as on past works. Particularly compelling are numerous letters that people from all over the country wrote Willie while he was waiting in jail. These writers discussed many topics, including their reflections on racial injustice and the need for religious redemption, not only for Willie, but also for his judgers and this country. Yet a number of letters were deeper, more private. Willie, it seems, was not only an imprint of the social and legal times, but also a projected muse of sorts, to whom individuals could confide their heartfelt thoughts and wishes – about God, death, health, hopes, family, even romance.
An epilogue concludes the chapter. It:
► begins with an account of my 2007 visit to St. Martinville, where, through interviews with current residents and remaining members of Willie’s family, the lasting personal impact of the Willie Francis saga is pieced together;
► continues with a history of the rise and fall of the electric chair as a method of execution and of the recent popularity of lethal injection; and
► ends with a critical analysis of Baze v. Rees (2008) (prior IntLawGrrls posts).
The U.S. Supreme Court’s highly splintered plurality decision in Baze relied in part on Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber, Willie’s 1947 case before the same Court, in order to uphold the constitutionality of Kentucky’s lethal injection protocol. This portion of the epilogue argues that, in light of the passage of six decades, which heralded massive changes in criminal law and procedure, the use of Resweber as modern guidance respecting the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments is troubling and inexcusable.