After spending nearly three decades maintaining his innocence on death row in Oklahoma, Richard Glossip now faces the possibility of winning his freedom following a groundbreaking decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. This week, the Court ordered Glossip to receive a new trial, ruling that prosecutors had failed to correct false testimony that could have influenced the jury’s decision in his case.
The question now is whether Oklahoma prosecutors will choose to retry Glossip at all.
Glossip was convicted in 1998 for allegedly orchestrating a murder-for-hire plot that led to the death of his boss, Barry Van Treese, a motel owner in Oklahoma City. Over the years, new issues surrounding the case have emerged, alongside political shifts that seem to be working in Glossip’s favor.
The fight to prevent Glossip’s execution has largely been led by pro-death penalty figures, including Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond. Drummond and other officials have stressed the importance of maintaining public trust in the state’s justice system, acknowledging that the doubts surrounding Glossip’s case would undermine confidence in the application of the death penalty.
“I have long maintained that I do not believe Mr. Glossip is innocent, but it is now an undeniable fact that he did not receive a fair trial,” Drummond stated. “The state’s system would be undermined if we proceed with an execution under these circumstances.”
Drummond, alongside Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna, must now decide whether to pursue a retrial. The decision will depend on the available evidence, the credibility of key witnesses, and the feasibility of prosecuting a case over 30 years old.
Prosecuting such a case is notoriously difficult due to the passage of time. Witnesses’ memories fade, and crucial physical evidence may no longer be available. In Glossip’s case, a central challenge lies with the prosecution’s star witness: Justin Sneed, the actual killer, who was given a life sentence in exchange for testifying against Glossip. The Supreme Court’s ruling this week was based on the fact that Sneed’s testimony contained falsehoods that were never corrected by the prosecution, thus diminishing its credibility and undermining Glossip’s conviction.
Drummond has indicated that even if prosecutors choose to retry the case, they might be reluctant to seek the death penalty. “Under today’s standard, very few prosecutors would seek a death penalty,” he noted, while reaffirming his belief that Glossip is guilty of being an accessory after the fact to the murder, due to his initial lies to the police.
Experts, such as Robin Maher, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, see this as a critical moment for Oklahoma prosecutors to demonstrate their commitment to justice. “Given the overwhelming evidence pointing to Glossip’s innocence, it would be hard to justify pursuing another capital prosecution,” Maher said.
For now, Richard Glossip remains in prison, though the Attorney General has requested that he be moved off death row. The state’s Department of Corrections will continue to hold him as the decision about whether to retry him is made.