Eddie Lee Howard, twice convicted and sentenced to death for the 1992 murder of an elderly Columbus woman, is back in court this week.
Testimony began Wednesday in Lowndes County Circuit Court, Judge Lee Howard presiding, after the Mississippi Supreme Court ordered the case be considered for post-conviction relief.
First convicted in 1994 for the brutal murder of Georgia Kemp, Howard has maintained his innocence, even after two separate juries found him guilty and sentenced him to death.
Now, with the substantial support of the Innocence Project, Howard returns to court for a hearing that can produce three outcomes: Judge Howard can deny the relief sought, returning him to death row. He can overturn the conviction without the possibility of another trial. He can order a new trial.
The first or third decisions are most likely.
No matter the outcome of this week’s proceedings, we feel the hearing is important and appropriate.
Our justice system, for all its flaws, is broadly considered the best the world has to offer. One of the reasons for that is a commitment to fairness and an honest pursuit of the truth.
The proceedings being held this week are not really so much an effort to judge Howard as it is examine the evidence used against him. Long before the Innocence Project took up the cause, the evidence used to convict Howard was subject to serious scrutiny, both in terms of the science itself and the manner in which it was collected.
There will be those who might argue that Howard has had his day in court and that the judgment of two juries should be sufficient.
Yet when reasonable doubt about the evidence or the conduct of a trial emerges it a testament to our system of judgment that those arguments are fairly considered.
Whatever the cost, whatever the implications, those efforts are warranted in the interest of justice. This is true of all cases, but especially true in death-penalty cases. We have no way to determine how many innocent people have been sent to their death by virtue of error, prosecutorial misconduct or attorney incompetence.
In death-penalty cases, the stakes are at their highest, which should require that every reasonable measure be taken to insure the proper verdict.
The work of the Innocence Project is to be commended, no matter the outcome.
We believe both the state’s attorneys and Howard’s attorneys share a great obligation in seeking the truth. Anything less is miscarriage of justice.
This week’s proceedings should not be viewed as an effort to determine Howard’s guilt or innocence, necessarily. Rather, what is on trial here is the evidence itself.
There can be no fair outcome without a fair trial.
The state does not benefit from a conviction built on a false evidence, just as Howard should not benefit from a doubt not supported by credible evidence.
Depending on Judge Howard’s ruling, the outcome of this week’s hearing may not be the definitive end of this long, tragic story, but it will point the path toward justice.
That is the outcome that serves us all.
The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 41 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.