North Carolina
March 11, 2005
The state of North Carolina is scheduled to execute William Dillard Powell on March 11, 2005 for the 1991 murder of Mary Gladden in Cleveland County.
While under the influence of cocaine, Powell entered a convenience store with the intent of robbing the store. He was unarmed when he entered the store and maintains he did not plan to harm anyone. When Gladden attempted to impede the robbery Powell picked up a heavy tool from behind the counter and used it to beat her to death.
Powell’s life had been taken over by his addictions to cocaine and alcohol, leaving him unable to hold a steady job to support himself. It also caused him to suffer from brain dysfunctions that impaired his memory, problem-solving skills, and motor skills. His condition worsened when he was under the influence of cocaine or alcohol, as he was when the murder of Gladden occurred.
Before becoming addicted to cocaine, he was the sole caretaker for his son who was profoundly retarded and autistic. He was very involved in his son’s care and development and even served on the advisory council for the Parent Teacher Organization at his son’s school. Powell also served in the U.S. Army, was a member of the Shelby Fire Department, and volunteered with the rescue squad.
Powell’s defense argued that his trial was unfair for several reasons. The defense was not entitled to individual voir dire during jury selection. Voir dire allows either attorney to challenge a perspective juror if he or she says or expresses a bias against the attorney’s case. The judge determined this was justified because he wanted to avoid the alleged domino effect of group voir dire, whereby one juror learns which answers will help him/her avoid jury duty.
However, the defense maintained they should have been allowed the privilege of voir dire. The jurors were not given peremptory instructions on mitigating circumstances in the penalty phase of the trial, which the defense feels should have occurred. The defense also argues that the confession Powell made after his Miranda waiver was destroyed should not have been admissible. The defense was also prohibited from alerting the jurors of some important statutory mitigating circumstances. For instance, the defense could not tell the jurors that Powell had no significant history of prior criminal activity.
The defense was not allowed to tell jurors that he had been a model prisoner while incarcerated. Lastly, the defense contends the prosecution belittled the sentencing process when they informed the jurors to focus on the crime instead of the mitigating evidence.
Please take a moment to urge Governor Easley to stop the execution of William Dillard Powell!
