NCADP - The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

William Henry Smith

March, 2005

Ohio

The state of Ohio is set to execute William H. Smith, a 47 year old African American man on March 8 for the 1987 rape and murder of Mary Virginia Bradford in Hamilton County.

On the evening of Sept. 26, 1987, Ms. Bradford went to a bar near her apartment in Cincinnati. Two days later, her boyfriend found her dead in her home of apparent stab wounds. Police tracked the murder to Smith, who met Ms. Bradford at the bar on the night of the 26^th. Smith admitted that he drove Ms. Bradford home, returning later to retrieve some drugs he accidentally left in her possession. When he inquired of Ms. Bradford where he could find the cocaine he left in her apartment, she stated that her boyfriend took it. Angry at the idea of losing several thousand dollars worth of drugs, Smith lashed out at Ms. Bradford. He was convicted in October of 1987 for her murder and rape and sentenced to death.

Smith experienced what court psychiatrist Dr. Schmidtgoessling characterized as a “bizarre” childhood. His mother had a history of mental illness, and she and his stepfather abused Smith and his siblings. As a child, Smith lived in foster care and spent several years at a state mental facility where he was diagnosed with an emotionally unstable personality and borderline intellectual functioning levels. Smith was given antipsychotic drugs and electric shock therapy as treatment. His deviant lifestyle continued into his teens; Smith began smoking marijuana at age 11 and started drinking alcohol at age 15. His IQ has been tested at 78, and he has organic brain damage, a fact not known at his original trial.

One of the biggest concerns in this case is the lack of a defense psychiatry expert at Smith’s trial. In October of 2003, Smith’s request for a writ of habeas corpus was denied by a 2-1 vote by the U.S. Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit. Appeals Judge R. Guy Cole, Jr., in his dissenting opinion, voiced his concern that if Smith had the mental health expert to which he was legally entitled, his sentence would not have resulted in death.

Previous courts have decided that the defense is entitled to a psychiatric expert in cases of questionable mental health. However, Smith’s trial included testimony by Dr. Schmidtgoessling, who functioned as a “friend of the court.” This had serious legal consequences for Smith’s case. Because Dr. Schmidtgoessling was not acting as an advocate for Smith, her evaluation did not look for mitigating factors to spare his life during the sentencing portion of the trial. Judge Cole noted that defendants like Smith are entitled access to a competent psychiatric expert who will assist in the evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense. By her own accord, Dr. Schmidtgoessling acknowledged that she did not do this. Judge Cole concludes that had Smith been given a defense rather than neutral expert, there would have been sufficient mitigating evidence presented to spare his life.

William Smith was denied his constitutional right to a fair trial. His trial attorneys and the court system failed him in not securing a defense psychiatric expert to attest to his horrific childhood and mental illness. During his 17 years on death row, Smith has been a model prisoner and continues to suffer from his mental illness and brain damage. The state of Ohio must not execute this man.

September 02, 2010

Subject:

Execution Alert March, 2005 Ohio The state of Ohio is set to execute William H. Smith, a 47 year old African American man on March 8 for the 1987 rape and murder of Mary Virginia Bradford in Hamilton County. On the evening of Sept. 26, 1987, Ms. Bradford went to a bar near her apartment in Cincinnati. Two days later, her boyfriend found her dead in her home of apparent stab wounds. Police tracked the murder to Smith, who met Ms. Bradford at the bar on the night of the 26th. Smith admitted that he drove Ms. Bradford home, returning later to retrieve some drugs he accidentally left in her possession. When he inquired of Ms. Bradford where he could find the cocaine he left in her apartment, she stated that her boyfriend took it. Angry at the idea of losing several thousand dollars worth of drugs, Smith lashed out at Ms. Bradford. He was convicted in October of 1987 for her murder and rape and sentenced to death. Smith experienced what court psychiatrist Dr. Schmidtgoessling characterized as a “bizarre” childhood. His mother had a history of mental illness, and she and his stepfather abused Smith and his siblings. As a child, Smith lived in foster care and spent several years at a state mental facility where he was diagnosed with an emotionally unstable personality and borderline intellectual functioning levels. Smith was given antipsychotic drugs and electric shock therapy as treatment. His deviant lifestyle continued into his teens; Smith began smoking marijuana at age 11 and started drinking alcohol at age 15. His IQ has been tested at 78, and he has organic brain damage, a fact not known at his original trial. One of the biggest concerns in this case is the lack of a defense psychiatry expert at Smith’s trial. In October of 2003, Smith’s request for a writ of habeas corpus was denied by a 2-1 vote by the U.S. Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit. Appeals Judge R. Guy Cole, Jr., in his dissenting opinion, voiced his concern that if Smith had the mental health expert to which he was legally entitled, his sentence would not have resulted in death. Previous courts have decided that the defense is entitled to a psychiatric expert in cases of questionable mental health. However, Smith’s trial included testimony by Dr. Schmidtgoessling, who functioned as a “friend of the court.” This had serious legal consequences for Smith’s case. Because Dr. Schmidtgoessling was not acting as an advocate for Smith, her evaluation did not look for mitigating factors to spare his life during the sentencing portion of the trial. Judge Cole noted that defendants like Smith are entitled access to a competent psychiatric expert who will assist in the evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense. By her own accord, Dr. Schmidtgoessling acknowledged that she did not do this. Judge Cole concludes that had Smith been given a defense rather than neutral expert, there would have been sufficient mitigating evidence presented to spare his life. William Smith was denied his constitutional right to a fair trial. His trial attorneys and the court system failed him in not securing a defense psychiatric expert to attest to his horrific childhood and mental illness. During his 17 years on death row, Smith has been a model prisoner and continues to suffer from his mental illness and brain damage. The state of Ohio must not execute this man.
We will add your signature from the information you provide.

First Name*

Last Name*

Email*

Street*

Street 2

City*

State/Province*

Zip/Postal Code*

Send an Email
Send a Fax