Marcellus Williams
the inevitable execution
Over the last few days the True Crime wing of the internet has exploded over the impending execution of Marcellus Williams. Every quasi-famous influencer has deemed themselves legal scholars and seasoned homicide detectives.
Every up-and-coming wannabe social justice warrior trying to earn their stripes in this game are virtue signaling constantly to the gods of equity and they do not care if posting misinformation is the cost of admission.
It is my duty to inform you of what really is going on in this case.
A quick guide to debunk the dishonest narrative and the false talking-points.
editor’s note
The only victim in this case is Felicia Gayle. An innocent 42-year-old-woman who was stabbed to death in her own home in 1998.
Allow me clear up the lies about the inevitable execution of Marcellus Williams.
1) Williams confessed to multiple people - including his girlfriend.
2) The victim’s purse, ID, clothes, and her husband’s laptop were found in Williams’ car.
3) He was convicted. By a jury of his peers.
4) The Williams defense team (including the well-funded Innocence Project) has had over 20 years to produce new evidence that proves his innocence - this is the legal standard post-conviction that is needed to overturn a conviction.
5) The DNA testing in recent years (with better technology) did not “clear” Williams.
6) In this more recent testing - the only DNA found belonged to members of the prosecution team - not a possible other/outstanding suspect.
7) The DNA was not mishandled by the standards practiced in 1998-2001.
8) The DNA evidence from the murder weapon (knife) was properly collected, without issue. Then, after it was collected - members of the prosecution team touched the knife without gloves - as was commonplace. They simply did not know the future evidentiary standards that would be in place in 2024. But, they followed the proper procedure at the time.
9) The Missouri Supreme Court reviewed all of this information & found, “no credible evidence of actual innocence or any showing of a constitutional error undermining confidence in the original judgment.”
10) The only Prosecutor with jurisdiction on this case is the Missouri AG (Andrew Bailey) - who has argued that Williams was legally convicted, that Williams was found guilty, and petitioned for the execution to proceed.
11) The current St. Louis County Prosecutor (Wesley Bell) was not a part of the original prosecution team and currently has zero jurisdiction over the case. His opinion is irrelevant. This was confirmed by the Missouri Supreme Court.
12) However, Wesley Bell has raised public concerns about the conviction and has advocated that Williams’ team continue to work on producing new evidence of innocence. Bell has argued that Williams’ death sentence be vacated and that he be remanded to a sentence of life in prison.
13) Wesley Bell has not argued that Williams’ entire conviction should be vacated - as many have falsely claimed.
Analysis
Without DNA evidence, video, or a confession - I understand why people are troubled with this case and the inevitable execution of Mr. Williams. I just encourage that their criticisms be based on fact, law, and reality instead of race-baiting conspiracy theory.
I have already been called a “racist” multiple times on multiple platforms by just posting some of the above factual information. But, we should not allow the ignorant personal attacks from uneducated drones dissuade us from spreading what is real.
Final Thoughts
Do not take this as an argument for/pro the death penalty. I have opinions on that issue but I have not expressed them in this article. The purpose here was to inform the public about the facts of this case - as social media influencers with millions of followers are spewing constant misinformation.
*If there is new evidence that Mr. Williams is innocent - it should be heard by the Court. We all would want this for ourselves and our loved ones. However, in this case, the Court did hear the arguments and were simply not convinced.
I would remind those people that for decades if not centuries, people were convicted of crimes based on the evidence, witnesses and other details before DNA became a thing. I would also remind those people that DNA evidence in the OJ Simpson case was absolute in its pointing to OJ Simpson as the Killer and that DNA evidence was completely overlooked. I would also point out to those same people that lack of DNA does not mean innocence, just that there was not enough transferred or that the DNA was contaminated or wiped clean in one way or another, apparently in this case by the way it was handled by the prosecution. It seems like the naysayers are simply trying to muddy up the waters and throwing the term racist around in an attempt to confuse the issue and mitigate the sentence of a man who confessed to multiple people that he murdered this woman.
I'd like to know where you are getting your information from because you don't cite anything and you don't include the appropriate context for your claims. The context is crucial to 'clear up the lies' surrounding the execution of Marcellus Williams. Are you actually interested in truth or justice? Are these omissions intentional or ignorance?
Addressing 1) and 2) Mr. Williams has been seeking to prove his innocence throughout the 23 years he has spent on Missouri’s death row. You also didn't include the fact that his girlfriend, who called law enforcement AFTER learning about a $10,000 cash reward was a drug addict and a prostitute with strong motivation to lie. Her testimony is particularly unreliable. Though, Mr. Williams was arrested with several of the victim’s possessions in his car, it was his girlfriend who had access to and control of the car, and, thus, the victim’s possessions. Notwithstanding, this country has a history of pressuring black men to confess things that are not true (See Mr. Trump and the Central Park Five).
Addressing 3) "The final jury was comprised of 11 white people and one Black person. And, the motion said, Larner questioned prospective Black and non-Black jurors differently, leaving Black jurors more susceptible to providing answers that would have disqualified them." Read more at: https://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/article292640464.html#storylink=cpy Again you leave out important context as if it does not have any consequence.
Addressing 4) through 6) Maybe you have not read the Innocence Project's report (where I source a lot of my information among other outlets); if you did you would know that 'all other forensic evidence collected at the time of the crime excluded Mr. Williams; forensic analysis confirmed that hairs and footprints collected from the scene did not come from Mr. Williams.' Also the DNA evidence on the knife that EXCLUDED Mr. Williams was NOT heard by the court that ordered the testing. Conversely, the husband was never a suspect in the trial. Again, things you left out that are necessary to the context of the case.
Addressing 11) through 13) Ignoring the PA's statement is convenient for someone not seeking justice but definitely not irrelevant to the case. "The Prosecuting Attorney confessed these constitutional errors following an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Section 547.031 RSMo, a statute designed to
empower local prosecutors to investigate and vacate wrongful convictions. ... Yet, the hearing court and the Supreme Court of Missouri failed to give these confessions of constitutional error their due weight in denying the Prosecuting Attorney’s effort to vacate Mr. Williams’ wrongful conviction and death sentence." https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A290/326699/20240923223202959_2024.09.23%20Williams%20Glossip%20Stay%20Motion%20FINAL.pdf
It seems your presentation is biased and I would ask that, even if you draw your same conclusion, be more accurate if you are seeking to be helpful to the conversation and advancement of justice in the world.