gary lynn sterling is a self-confessed murderer who was, until last wednesday, scheduled to be executed by the state of texas on may 25, 2005. 

in 1989, after he was arrested in connection with the murder of two elderly brothers, sterling volunteered to help clear up another case and led authorities to a location at which two bodies were found.  he was subsequently charged with one of those murders (no prosecution was initiated for the other for which sterling is the chief suspect), convicted and sentenced to be executed.

so...a guy who has admitting killing at least 3 people was about to get what he deserves.   

apparently not.

one member of the jury which voted to execute sterling gave a post-trial interview in which this juror unequivocally  characterized sterling with a nasty racial slur.  this juror--who predictably denied being a racist, offering as proof a claim to having black friends--eventually provided sworn testimony in an affidavit requested by sterling's defense counsel in which he used the same slur to describe blacks who lived in his neighborhood whom, he maintained, did nothing much more than sell crack when they weren't in jail and otherwise generally engaged in "hollering and cursing" and  "a couple of 'em shot each other last Juneteenth over a card game." (no mention of gold teeth tho.)

there was one more thing about black people that hadn't escaped him.  he said he was well aware black people found his favorite word offensive and 'highly resented' his use of it.  he didn't give a shit.

quite a nasty little surprise huh?  

nope.   sterling's court-appointed attorney was acquainted with this juror and well aware the guy hadda problem with black people.  the learned rob dunn, esq--who was assigned to defend sterling--didn't mention that  fact to his client nor did he convey his personal knowledge to the court until it was dragged outta him after the trial.

 according to dunn, the guy may have been a racist but hey...that didn't necessarily preclude him as a potential juror.  nothing there to indicate he couldn't arrive at a fair decision.  dunn also stated he felt having the guy on the jury and sitting in judgment of his client would work to sterling's benefit since dunn and the juror already had a relationship. 
 
 although two appeals courts disagreed with dunn's assessment--with one (5th federal district) reporting it found  the juror's racism and statements to be 'at least, highly disturbing' while the other (5th federal district court of appeals) used 'n******' rather than the actual word when referring to the slur in question--both rejected sterling's claim that he'd been inadequately and incompetently represented.   far as they could see, dunn's 'strategic' decision was a valid, if unsuccessful, strategy.
 
 the supreme court agreed to accept sterling's writ of cert and last week thursday entertained arguments from both sides. the state of texas through  the person of its attorney general rejects sterling's claim of racial discrimination asserting--among other things--using the slur publicly and frequently is no reason to conclude a juror might be a  racist (now where have we  heard that one before?).   even if it did, however, sterling should have raised  the issue earlier in the process and therefore  the supreme court lacks jurisdiction on a procedural basis.
 
 altho the supreme court has yet to rule, sterling caught a break last friday when the last judge to set an execution date was forced to recuse himself and another judge was called in.  seems that first judge forgot he'd been the prosecutor at sterling's sentencing hearing back in 1989.
 
 “It was brought to my attention that I had testified in a 1989 ... hearing (concerning Sterling), which precludes me from setting an execution date,”  the honorable john jackson explained.. “I had forgotten it ... my memory doesn't hold that many years.”
 
 should the supreme court agree with the state of texas or decide to contradict its previously stated positions:  "it is the jury that is a criminal defendant's fundamental 'protection of life and liberty against race or color prejudice' " and  "a defendant has the right to an impartial jury that can view him without racial animus.", sterling still has two options.  
 
according to the corsicana (tx) 'daily sun', Sterling's "only remaining hope will be in the hands of the Texas Board of Parole and Pardons, a body not known for staying executions.

Then, should he turned down by the board, his last appeal for mercy will be in the hands of Gov. Rick Perry."

in other words, he'll be executed in august 2005.