Guess who gets to die again? Robert Van Hook (pictured), the convicted murderer of David Self, who was strangled and stabbed to death after Van Hook met him in a Cincinnati gay bar with the intent to rob him. And who made the call that Van Hook should once again face the death penalty? Oh, just a small committee of people some know as the U.S. Supreme Court.
Reversing a federal court appeal decision that said Van Hook lacked sufficient defense counsel during the sentencing portion of his 1985 trial. Columbus Dispatch:
The 10-page opinion was highly critical of the appeals court. The justices wrote that it was “clear that Van Hook’s attorneys met the constitutional minimum of competence.”
In particular, the justices criticized the lower court for basing its ruling on guidelines for defense lawyers issued in 2003 by the American Bar Association. The guidelines were issued nearly 20 years after Van Hook’s trial.
The justices wrote that the appeals court “treated the ABA’s 2003 guidelines not merely as evidence of what reasonably diligent attorneys would do, but as inexorable commands with which all capital defense counsel” must comply.
Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray had asked the high court to overturn the appeals court decision. In a statement, Cordray said he was “very pleased with the court’s decision. The trial court learned extensive details about Mr. Van Hook’s difficult childhood and upbringing, but the court still elected to impose a death sentence. That decision was appropriate given the horrific nature of the murder in this case.”
Well, that and: “Van Hook had a long history of luring gay men into secluded settings to rob them, the Supreme Court noted.”
Keith Kimmel
Good riddance.
The only injustice here is that he will die a much less painful death than the victim, and that he wont die alone like a piece of discarded trash, like the victim did.
republican
Enjoy the injection, asswipe!
scott ny'er
so this is it then, correct? no more second chances, this is the last word, no more appeals, correct?
Attmay
@1 Keith Kimmel:
“The only injustice here is that he will die a much less painful death than the victim, and that he wont die alone like a piece of discarded trash, like the victim did.”
Agreed. I’m pro-death penalty because of human garbage like this. I was hoping they’d fry him.
Disappointing
Abysmal that gays are so gleeful about the imposition of the death penalty in a case that had serious serious constitutional flaws. How can gays trumpet the protections of the constitution which have yet to be expounded, yet deny the constitutional rights of others? Did any of you actually read the opinion of the Sixth Circuit explaining the issues? or just killed a gay= lethal injection?
Just because you kill a gay person doesn’t make the death penalty automatically appropriate.
Keith Kimmel
“Just because you kill a gay person doesn’t make the death penalty automatically appropriate.”
I disagree. If you – with malice, intent, and while knowing what you are doing – kill someone, you should be put to death. And honestly, I favor less appeals. I think you should get one shot at the appellate system there is new evidence uncovered.
republican
Disappointing,
Please whine to someone who gives a damn, because the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken and the 6th Circuit’s decision in this case is now worth its weight in toilet paper. The 6th circuit has been messing with death cases for years in pursuit of it’s anti-capital punishment agenda. As the High Court made clear, in this case the circuit vastly overstated the strength of the claims in this case.
And this wasn’t a 5-4 split, so please don’t attempt to reply that it was the eeeevil conservatives at work. The SCOTUS unanimously reversed the 6th Circuit, and if you know anything about capital cases at the SCOTUS, you know that getting all nine justices to sign on to one opinion in a death case (especially one that rules against the person on death row) can be a hard thing to do.
Bill
The governmental killing of people to show that killing is wrong is both inhumane and vile.
Even when it is done to inhumane and vile people.
Disappointing
Republican and all you others, I’m glad the Supreme Court is so authoritative. When they reject David Boies lawsuit arguing Prop 8 was unconstitutional, I expect you also will say how wonderful they are!
Keith Kimmel – you favor less appeals? Well, he won the last one. But I also assume youf avor less appeals re: the unconstitutionality of same-sex marriage bans?
I just would appreciate some logical consistency here. Silly me
Disappointing
And Republican, getting 9 justices is hard to do, yes. But its not super easy to get 3 circuit judges to do something either. There’s also no one on the Supreme Court who is particularly liberal, at best left-moderates. So I wouldnt expect them to agree with my constitutional analysis.
Offensive
I have no moral objection to putting people to death, but I certainly do have an ethical objection. Innocent people go to jail all the time. Innocent people get put to death. Some–definitely not all–police and prosecutors fabricate evidence. Some lawyers just plain suck. How can any of you condone a practice of murdering anyone without 100% certainty that everyone of them is 100% guilty? It’s just barbaric.
There is no legitimate purpose for a death penalty. More than 100 years of research shows that it has no deterrent effect whatsoever. And, it’s more cost effective to keep someone alive to rot in jail for the rest of his/her life. The only benefit is revenge, and that is sad.
I, for one, look forward to the day that I know that this country is not sanctioning the murder of anyone.
Attmay
This guy is 100% guilty. Justice will be served when he is 100% dead.
What this scumbag did was murder, and for this his life is worth nothing. If he robs the victims of their right to life, why should the state allow them to continue to live at taxpayer’s expense? There is a difference between murder and killing and that difference is the intent. The intent of the state is to punish him for depriving someone of their life. Van Hook’s intent was to take an innocent man’s life.
Stop the bumper sticker-level moral equivalence crap. The death penalty is no more murder than abortion. I’m also pro-choice, as the idea that life begins at conception is a Christian concept that I don’t subscribe to. And if laws and punishment are not deterrent to crime, then why not just have anarchy?
Die, Van Hook, die.
Keith Kimmel
“Keith Kimmel – you favor less appeals? Well, he won the last one. But I also assume youf avor less appeals re: the unconstitutionality of same-sex marriage bans?”
I favor less appeals for death row inmates in the absence of new and compelling evidence. Meaning, you only get to bitch that your lawyer sucked once. Just cause your lawyer sucked doesn’t mean that the trial was not fair.
I cant believe I am sitting here with what I presume are a bunch of queers who are actually advocating the notion of letting a gay basher/preyer off. Thats a new one on me.
There are too many people on this planet as it is. There is no room left for some. This guy is a piece of shit. His continued existence costs me money and depletes the atmosphere of oxygen. Why should I make the sacrifice?
Comparing gay marriage to the death penalty is illogical because there is no comparison to be drawn. You comparing penal law to civil law. This might explain why you cannot find consistent logic.
SCOTUS is not perfect. Sometimes they are dead wrong. In this case, they were dead right.
Now, can we please kill the son of a bitch now?
Alexander
This scum deserves whatever he gets, short of death. No one deserves death for a crime. It’s not moral, and the price the state pays through appeals and housing death row inmates often exceeds the costs of a lifetime imprisonment. So the “eye-for-an-eye” is not only socially wrong, but is also economically flawed. And if we’re so set on revenge (a petty emotion, but whatever), let him rot in jail, devoid of freedom for his last remaining years. Killing this man is not justice, it is petty retaliation.
Attmay
“Now, can we please kill the son of a bitch now?”
I used to be a leftist Democrat pre 9/11, and even then I wanted Matthew Shepard’s killers to get the death penalty. And I wanted an exception to the regulations against “cruel and unusual punishment.” I think making taxpayers pay to keep scum like this who have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is cruel and unusual.
Now that we have Hate Crimes “protection” (snicker), it makes me sick that they took out the death penalty provision of the Matthew Shepard Act.
Kill Robert Van Hook and all gay bashers!
dogg487
I AM VANHOOKS EX-BROTHER IN-LAW AND I KNOW WHAT HIS LIFE WAS LIKE. HE WAS MENTALY MESSED UP IN THE HEAD. HE SERVED HIS COUNTRY AND WHEN HIS COUNTRY TURNED THERE BACK ON HIM LIKE OTHERS DID WHEN HE NEEDED HELP WELL HE KINDA DID LIKE HE WAS TRAINED TO DO “KILL”.. NOT TO EXCUSE HIM FOR THE CRIME HE COMMITTED BUT TO FORGIVE HIM LIKE THE GOOD LORD SAY`S TO. GO IN PEICE BRO. NO MORE PAIN AND NO MORE FEAR GOD BLESS
RocketInMO
I’m about to become one of the most hated people on Queerty with what I’m about to say. The government should not be in the business of executing people, period. Violence doesn’t end violence. The death penalty doesn’t serve it’s “purported idea” – to deter future crime. If it did, we wouldn’t have any more murder. Instead, it serves one age-old reason: vengeance. If that’s the case, let’s all agree that is the reason and say so. “Justice” isn’t supposed to be about vengeance, but if it is, let’s all agree it is. If that is the case, and if we *do* also want to use the death penalty as a deterrent to future crime, then all executions in this country, regardless of method, should be televised, live, in prime-time (from the needle to hanging, firing squad [recently no longer an option]), required on all media subject to *any* FCC regulations (so, virtually all broadcast methods, from traditional tv networks to short-wave). Further, all footage of every past execution should be made public for free and to publish without cost. The only way for death as a consequence to crime is to expose our children from it at an early age so they can understand they can learn that certain future actions may have death as a consequence – it’s the hallmark of behavioral modification (not everyone needs it, but to make sure those that do are exposed, everyone needs to be exposed). As long as we keep what happens secret, then it can’t be a deterrent. Oh, and let’s make sure that every person executed is guilty, without exception. Otherwise, those involved in the investigation and prosecution, as well as the execution, are all guilty of murder, too. What should be their treatment? Personally, I’d love to execute (kill) all of the rapists, murderers, pedophiles and terrorists (even those guilty but not found guilty), but our society is not even close to designing a system that is truly just to use it as a method of vengeance, punishment, and deterrence. We just bumble along and hope it all works out in the end. Not a great method of delivering a form of justice from which mistakes cannot ever be made right.
Lawyer on appeals
People claim all the time that the appeals process needs to be truncated. Well, the problem is that the process is flawed, because people are flawed. INNOCENT people exhaust all their appeals and rot in jail for crimes they did not commit. It happens. Maybe not even vaguely often, but it happens. A great example is Virginia. Imagine in Virginia that one month after your final conviction, you discover a video tape showing that your client did not commit the murder he was convicted of. Unless his lawyer can show that it was not possible to find that video tape earlier, THE STATE WILL DISREGARD IT. THE CONVICTION STANDS. AN INNOCENT MAN OR WOMAN IS WRONGLY IMPRISONED AND/OR KILLED. Shit, look the recent case in TX where it is clear that the governor quashed an investigation that proved an innocent man was put to death for an arson fire that led to his children’s death. The irony: three independent examiners–included one hired by the state–found that there was no evidence whatsoever for arson.
I just don’t see how one can justify killing another human being when there never can be 100% certainty that he committed the crime or that factors do not favor life imprisonment over death. Looks at the stats. Blacks get sentenced to death at a ridiculously higher rate than whites. That rate skyrockets when the defendant is black and his victim is white. Women rarely get the death penalty, regardless of the heinousness of their crimes. We just can’t be fair. Just look at the Innocence Project or the Center for Wrongful Convictions for a quick glimpse. The people supporting those convictions believed as vehemently as some of you do that the convicted “criminals” committed the crimes for which they were convicted. Unfortunately for everyone, they were wrong–and innocent men and women went to jail for extraordinary lengths of time.
AL
Once again, liberals are sympathetic towards convicted scumbag murderers. How about some sympathy towards victims’ families? You people talk about so-called “hate crime” laws, and yet you act like pussies when it comes to disposing of the society’s most cruel and intolerant individuals. Respect for the families of victims and respect for taxpayers money that are being wasted on endless appeals to death verdicts should be the top priority. Whining about the “rights” of felons is not my priority. I am pleased that justice prevailed and the gay-hating scumbag will be put to sleep like a wild dog. I think lethal inject is too soft on criminals. How about we bring back the Old Sparky or a firing squad. KILL ‘EM ALL!
Kevin
I knew David Self, an unbelievably funny, incredibly smart and much-loved young man. While David was horricially and brutally murdered nearly 26 years ago, we’re still debating what to do w/his killer. Given the tragic and heartbreaking manner of David’s death, Robert VanHook deserved nothing BUT the death penalty. This animal should have been put to death years ago. His demise could never equal what was done to David so many years ago…
Kevin
I knew David Self, an unbelievably funny, incredibly smart and much-loved young man. While David was horricially and brutally murdered nearly 26 years ago, we’re still debating what to do w/his killer. Given the tragic and heartbreaking manner of David’s death, Robert VanHook deserved nothing BUT the death penalty. This animal should have been put to death years ago. His demise could never equal what was done to David so many years ago…
Read more: http://www.queerty.com/supreme-court-gives-gay-man-killer-robert-van-hook-new-chance-to-die-20091110/#comments#ixzz0oz9l63ja
@dogg487:
Ed
@Keith Kimmel:
I am looking for people to interview who know either Robert van Hook or the man he killed, David Self. I covered the trial for my newspaper, The Gaybeat, in 1985, and want to return to the story as it nears its conclusion.
You may reach me at [email protected]
— Ed
Ed
@dogg487:
I have spoken with Mr. Van Hook and other family members; I would like to speak with you, too.
Ed
[email protected]
Kevin in Cincy
@Ed: Ed, I tried to respond to your message, but got a “delivery failure” notice saying [email protected] “doesn’t have a yahoo account”. Go figure…
Kevin in Cincy
@Ed: I meant “engishlanguagemaster”…
Ed
That address should work; I just checked it.
The components of the address are english followed by language followed by master.
ed