Over the past years, one of the main topics I have consistently seen is how we can improve our government. Whether it’s specific laws that get overturned, passed, or even just the two-party system providing more reason to cause a divide in our country; which could be avoided if society pushed for real change and trustworthy elected officials to make positive changes. With Marcellus Williams, this conversation has to be had with everyone. It is a known issue that the federal and state governments run off an outdated constitution that cannot be applied in this day and age. So, what was the outcome of the Marcellus Williams case, and how does this case show our government’s true colors?Â
On Aug. 11, 1998, Marcellus Williams was convicted for the death of Felicia Gayle, a former reporter for the St. Louis dispatch. The investigation had gone cold until an inmate by the name of Henry Cole claimed that Williams confessed to him about the murder; however, these statements were inconsistent with those prior statements, and with those statements, no information could be provided or verified independently. Years later, in 2016, Williams went through DNA testing to show that the DNA that was on the murder weapon was not his. This information was initially released only to the legal teams involved in the case and shared with Governor Greitens; however, it has yet to be made public. Concerned that this information might eventually spark controversy when it reached the media, Governor Greitens convened a board of inquiry to investigate the case further. In June 2023, while the Board of Inquiry was still reviewing the case, Governor Mike Parson unexpectedly dissolved the Board without any prior notice or report from them. Following this dissolution, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey requested a new execution date. Mr. Williams filed a civil suit against Governor Parson because the dissolution of the Board without a report or recommendation violated Missouri law and Mr. Williams’s constitutional rights (Maule).Â
The judge denied the governor’s motion to dismiss this lawsuit, and the governor persuaded the Missouri Supreme Court to get involved. However, on June 4, 2024, the Missouri Supreme Court dismissed Williams’s civil lawsuit and immediately rescheduled his execution for Sept 24, 2024. Now, I want to take a second in the middle of this to highlight that they knew there was evidence that could get Williams out of jail. The lack of consideration and dismissal of this evidence failed to get him out of jail and sentenced him to death. The circuit court held an evidentiary hearing on Aug 28, 2024, where they subsequently ruled that it lacked sufficient evidence that Williams was innocent and that his claims of racially biased jury selection and ineffective assistance of Counsel had previously been raised and rejected. It’s important to note that the jury in his trial was predominantly Caucasian people; his jury was composed of 11 people of which there was only one black person.Â
The government’s handling of this case shines a harsh light on its failings. It raises profound moral questions about the value of human life in a system more interested in preserving institutional integrity than addressing justice. As Daniel Ziblatt, a prominent political scientist, points out, our constitution, rooted in a pre-democratic era, has yet to keep pace with modern values. This outdated framework enables corrupt practices to persist with limited adaptability, unequal power distribution, vulnerable legal loopholes, and inadequate protections and safeguards, as the institutions meant to safeguard citizens too often fail the most vulnerable (DeSmith).
In the case of Marcellus Williams, we see how such a corrupt government can lead to the most irreversible consequence: death. At the center of this horrific tragedy is the failure of moral responsibility. How can we, as a society, allow the execution of a potentially innocent man, with evidence that could’ve led to his release? This case is a gruesome reminder that it’s not just a matter of policy, but also life and death. If we cannot have these difficult conversations about the deep-rooted issues within our government, we will fail those who need us the most.Â