The state of Indiana is scheduled to execute 40 year-old Kevin A. Conner, a white man, July 27th for the January 26, 1988 stabbing death of Steve Wetland, 19, and the shooting deaths of Tony Moore, 24, and Bruce Voge, 19, all white in Marion County. 

The court rejected Conner's five arguments that the Indiana death penalty statute was unconstitutional.  His argument outlined the main problems with the death penalty as a punishment.  He argued that it was arbitrary and capricious and, therefore, cruel and unusual based on the fact that the prosecution chooses when to pursue the death penalty and when not to, and that even if the jury recommends the death penalty, that the judge has the discretion to override that recommendation and sentence an individual to death.  He argued that the jury's lack of guidance in determining when aggravating factors outweigh mitigating factors renders the statute unconstitutional.  He claimed that the Indiana statute does not sufficiently detail appelate review or require comparative proportionality review.  He also highlighted the fact that the statute fails to properly narrow the class of homocides which are eligible for the death penalty.  This meant that just because an individual committed the "worst" crime did not guarantee that individual would get the death penalty.

He was denied the opportunity for individualized, sequestered questioning of prospective jurors.  He also argues that conducting questioning in the presence of other jurors and the press inhibits openness and honesty and thus may adversely affect the jury selection process.

Conner's challenge to evidentiary rulings and to the sufficiency of the evidence were all rejected.  He testified at court that the police continued to question him after his request for an attorney, and therefore his confession should not have been admitted into evidence.  He also argued that the three separate counts should have been tried separately so that the jury would not get confused.  The trial court found that trying the three counts together would not be too confusing and complex for the jury to distinguish between the separate counts.

At the time, Conner had no significant history of criminal conduct.  Conner was still dealing with the loss of his father.  He shows genuine remorse for these incidents.  There is evidence that he has the ability to live peacefully.  This and other mitigating evidence was taken into account at trial and appeal, but was found by the court not to be a significant factor in sentencing Conner to death. 

Please take a moment to write Governor Mitch Daniels and the Board of Pardons and Paroles to recommend that Kevin Conner's life be sparred.