On Monday, a state trial judge found there was enough evidence to justify a hearing about Mr. Awkal’s sanity but that he could not hold one immediately because witnesses were not available. The Ohio Supreme Court should have granted a stay of execution, which it wrongly denied shortly before the governor stepped in because of the trial court’s finding.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/opini ... D88C73E601
So the thinking was that since it was a problem to assemble witnesses we ought to just kill a human being because otherwise it is inconvenient or something. Is that it?