Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-7955_aplc.pdf
Page Number: 46

6 

GLOSSIP v. GROSS 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

States, and by the Federal Government. 

We  owe  victims  more  than  this  sort  of  pseudoscientific
assessment of their lives.  It is bad enough to tell a mother 
that  her  child’s  murder  is  not  “worthy”  of  society’s  ulti-
mate  expression  of  moral  condemnation.    But  to  do  so 
based  on  cardboard  stereotypes  or  cold  mathematical 
calculations is beyond my comprehension.  In my decades
on  the  Court,  I  have  not  seen  a  capital  crime  that  could
not  be  considered  sufficiently  “blameworthy”  to  merit  a 
death  sentence  (even  when  genuine  constitutional  errors 
justified a vacatur of that sentence).3 

A  small  sample  of  the  applications  for  a  stay  of  execu-
tion  that  have  come  before  the  Court  this  Term  alone 
proves my point.  Mark Christeson was due to be executed 
in October 2014 for his role in the murder of Susan Brouk 
and  her  young  children,  Adrian  and  Kyle.  After  raping 

—————— 

3 For  his  part,  JUSTICE  BREYER  explains  that  his  experience  on  the 
Court has shown him “discrepancies for which [he] can find no rational 
explanations.”  Post, at 16.  Why, he asks, did one man receive death for 
a  single-victim  murder,  while  another  received  life  for  murdering  a 
young  mother  and  nearly  killing  her  infant?  Ibid.   The  outcomes  in 
those two cases may not be morally compelled, but there was certainly 
a  rational  explanation  for  them:  The  first  man,  who  had  previously 
confessed  to  another  murder,  killed  a  disabled  man  who  had  offered 
him a place to stay for the night.  State v. Badgett, 361 N. C. 234, 239– 
240,  644  S. E.  2d  206,  209–210  (2007).    The  killer  stabbed  his  victim’s 
throat and prevented him from seeking medical attention until he bled 
to death.  Ibid.  The second man expressed remorse for his crimes and 
claimed  to  suffer  from  mental  disorders.    See  Charbonneau,  Andre 
Edwards Sentenced to Life in Prison for 2001 Murder, WRAL, Mar. 26, 
2004,  online  at  http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/109648  (all  Inter-
net  materials  as  visited  June  25,  2015,  and  available  in  Clerk  of  Court’s 
case file); Charbonneau, Jury Finds Andre Edwards Guilty of First-Degree 
Murder, WRAL, Mar. 23, 2004, online at http://www.wral.com/news/local/ 
story/109563.    The  other  “discrepancies”  similarly  have  “rational” 
explanations,  even  if  reasonable  juries  could  have  reached  different 
results.