Georgia's death an executioner on a prosecutor concealed

An executioner on Georgia’s death row claims that a prosecutor concealed a plea agreement with a crucial witness, tainting his trial.

Georgia’s death row claims that a prosecutor concealed a plea agreement

SAVANNAH, Georgia The attorneys of a Georgia prisoner who was placed on death row 25 years ago are claiming that the prosecutor is concealing a transaction that undermines the reliability of a key witness in the trial.

After an Appling County jury found Warren King guilty of killing convenience store clerk Karen Crosby, who was shot and killed during an armed robbery in southeast Georgia, King was given the death penalty in September 1998.

King’s attorneys now claim to have proof that John B. Johnson, the assistant district attorney who handled the case, had a previously unknown agreement with the lone eyewitness to the crime. They are requesting a hearing from a Superior Court judge in Butts County, Georgia’s death row home, in an attempt to secure a new trial for King.

Evidence presented during King’s murder trial revealed that Smith had his uncle’s revolver and a mask with him when he and King conspired to rob the small-town convenience store in September 1994. Both men were put on trial for the murder of Crosby, with King going on trial first.

Smith was given immunity by the prosecution to testify during King’s trial, and he informed the jury that King had shot the woman. No other witnesses or tangible evidence, according to King’s attorneys, implicated King with the shooting.

King’s attorneys stated in a July 8 court filing that prosecutors withheld information from defense counsel and the trial jury about Johnson’s pledge to spare Smith from a potential death sentence in exchange for Smith’s testimony.

According to King’s appellate attorneys, prosecutors would have had to tell defense attorneys about any favorable treatment Smith received in exchange for testifying. If King’s trial lawyers had been aware of the arrangement, they may have utilized it to undermine Smith’s reliability as a witness.

In King’s court filing, lawyer Anna Arceneaux stated, “There is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different had this suppressed evidence been disclosed.”

In his verdict, Arceneaux claimed that Johnson and Smith had both denied the existence of the agreement in statements to the jury, in addition to the prosecutors not telling defense lawyers about it before to the 1998 trial.

Johnson was contacted by the Associated Press on Wednesday in an attempt to obtain comment. In 2021, the seasoned prosecutor announced his retirement from the Brunswick Judicial Circuit district attorney’s office. In a May Republican primary contest, he ran against District Attorney Keith Higgins, but was unsuccessful.

An statement from John B. Brewer III, one of Smith’s attorneys, is included in the new court filings, stating that Johnson and Smith came to a plea deal prior to the trial. In exchange for Smith testifying against King, he would be given a life sentence with the possibility of release. Smith was given that penalty in 2001 after entering a guilty plea to a charge of killing Crosby.

Brewer’s affidavit stated, “There was a verbal agreement, but these terms were not reduced to writing.” “Unless I knew with certainty that Mr. Smith had a deal and would avoid the death penalty, I would never have recommended that he testify against Mr. King,” he continued.

A transcript of Johnson’s closing remarks from the 1998 trial states that he informed the jury that he would have had to reveal any transactions with Smith “because it tests his credibility.”

Johnson told the trial jury, “There are no deals or he would have told you that.” “And if there had been a defense, they would have made sure you heard that.”

King’s most recent bid to get his death sentence revoked follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2 rejection of his arguments that Johnson wrongfully barred Black jurors from the trial. Ten White jurors and two Black juries heard the trial of King, a Black man.

After King’s attorneys provided proof that Johnson used strikes to exclude 87.5% of the eligible Black jurors and only 8.8% of the eligible White jurors—all women—from the trial, lower courts maintained King’s guilt and sentencing.

Attorneys are not permitted to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race, according to a 1986 ruling by the US Supreme Court. Johnson provided further, non-racial justifications during the trial for excluding Black panelists from the jury.

King’s attorneys reiterate in their July 8 court brief that prospective Black jurors were excluded because to their race. They provide brand-new proof, which they acquired last autumn: Johnson’s own handwritten notes. According to the attorneys, Johnson kept meticulous record of which potential jurors were women and which were Black.

According to King’s lawyers, Johnson made notes about prospective Black jurors’ responses to inquiries about the death penalty and their criminal pasts. They claim he tracked which prospective white jurors had family members who were victims of crimes instead of making similar notes for white panelists.

The prosecutor’s notes, according to King’s attorneys, offer “concrete proof that Johnson was indeed considering race and gender” of potential jurors.