Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Allen Lee DAVIS
Robbery
But opponents of the death penalty insisted the
chair doesn't work. D. Michael McCarron, executive director of the
Florida Catholic Conference, which represents Florida's bishops,
said, ''If there is any doubt whatsoever about the proper
functioning of that chair, tomorrow's scheduled execution of Thomas
Provenzano should not go forward... They ought to stop.'' Provenzano
opened fire in 1984 at the Orange County Courthouse in Orlando. He
had been scheduled to die Wednesday, but was given a 48-hour stay
Tuesday night. His execution had been reset for 7:01 a.m. today, but
has been postponed.
The American Civil Liberties Union called on Bush
to halt all executions until the state can assure they are conducted
humanely. ''Criminals no doubt deserve to be punished, and the
severity of the punishment should be appropriate to their
culpability,'' said Howard Simon, executive director of ACLU of
Florida. ''But Florida's record of executions, and the Legislature's
obsession with electrocution as the method of execution, has been
barbaric,'' Simon said.
But Weiler said his family's murders were
barbaric. He recalled that Davis admitted that a prime motive that
day was ''to rape and kill my daughter Kristina, 9, then to murder
my wife and younger daughter [Katherine, 5]. A secondary motive was
to rob my residence.'' ''I relate these details to you, the citizens
of Florida, so there is no question of the cruel and terrible deaths
that Allen Lee Davis inflicted on his victims,'' Weiler said in a
news conference after the execution.
Recalling that Davis had
committed crimes before killing his family, Weiler said, ''Davis was
a deviant animal that should have been permanently caged or executed
many years before May 1982... The execution today was a legal, moral
and righteous one, and I can assure you God approves.'' (Times-Union
staff writers Bruce Bryant-Friedland and Jim Saunders contributed to
this report. )
Florida: Torture is Still All the Rage
Allen Lee Davis was electrocuted July 8 in yet
another grisly Florida execution. Upon examining photos from Davis’
execution, one medical expert observed that Davis experienced pain
as the mouthpiece pushed up against his nostrils, causing his nose
to bleed and suffocating him before the electricity struck his body.
Despite the horror movie nature of Davis’ death, Florida Governor
Jeb Bush said he is still "convinced that the electric chair is an
appropriate way to carry out death sentences in Florida."
The Chair’s Horrific History
This is not the first time that Florida’s 76-year-old
electric chair has performed its "job" in a particularly repulsive
way. The 1990 electrocution of Jesse Tafero caused flames to burst
from his head the instant electricity was applied. According to the
Florida Department of Corrections (DOC), the synthetic sponge that
lined the electrical head fitting had caught fire.
To demonstrate their theory, they put a similar
sponge in a kitchen toaster, where it caught fire. Another test was
conducted with a fire-resistant sea sponge, using a tub of water to
replace the body and a colander for the head. This sponge did not
catch fire. As a result of these Frankenstein-like experiments,
synthetic sponges were banned. Despite the ban on synthetic sponges,
Pedro Medina’s head erupted into flames during his electrocution in
March 1997. Immediately following this second atrocity, prisoner Leo
Alexander Jones sued the Florida DOC on the basis that the electric
chair constituted cruel and unusual punishment (which is banned by
the US Constitution).
The Florida Supreme Court imposed a five-month
moratorium in 1997 while it considered Jones’ suit. The court
ultimately upheld the chair as constitutional and executions resumed.
It did order the DOC to write down their execution procedures, which
up until that point had only been relayed by word of mouth. In an
particularly cruel mandate, the court ordered Jones to watch the
next test of the electric chair. Unfortunately, official scrutiny of
the chair’s use has done little to inform the public. In November
last year, Florida voters passed a ballot initiative that wrote
death by electrocution into Florida’s State Constitution.
The Debate Goes On
Earlier this year, the Florida DOC hired a
structural engineer to evaluate the chair. The inspector determined
that the problem was the wooden chair itself. In a morbid twist, he
then posed in the chair for a photo, which he plans to use as his
Christmas card. Before Davis’s execution, the State of Florida
announced that it had replaced the 72-year-old electric chair with a
new one. The DOC did in fact replace the chair with a replica from
the DOC museum, but the original electrical anodes that are attached
to the victim were not replaced.
In the hearing following Davis’s electrocution,
Florida Supreme Court Judge Clarence Johnson ruled that the chair
did not constitute cruel and usual punishment. Johnson’s 33-page
decision read like a medical opinion: " Allen Lee Davis did not
suffer any conscious pain while being electrocuted in Florida’s
electric chair. Rather, he suffered instantaneous and painless death
once the current was applied to him." The court appears unwilling to
intervene no matter how bloody the execution. Contact Governor Jeb
Bush and tell him that the electric chair is cruel and unusual
punishment!
CrimeMagazine.com
"The color photos taken by DOC show a ghastly
post-execution scene: Davis is wearing a white shirt and dark pants
and is restrained in the wooden chair by thick leather straps placed
across his arms, legs, torso, and mouth; the electrical head-piece
is attached to the top of his head with a leather strap that runs
under his chin; a sponge placed under the head-piece obscures the
entire top portion of his head down to his eyebrows; because of the
width of the mouth-strap, only a small portion of Davis' face is
visible above the mouth-strap and below the sponge, and that portion
is bright purple and scrunched tightly upwards; his eyes are
clenched shut and his nose is pushed so severely upward that it is
barely visible above the mouth-strap; although the exterior openings
of Davis' nostrils are partially visible, it appears as though the
interior openings may be covered by the mouth-strap; a stream of
blood pours from his nostrils, flows over the wide leather mouth-strap,
runs down his neck and chest, and forms a bright red pool (approximately
eight by twelve inches) on his white shirt. The scene is
unquestionably violent."
Factoid: This was believed to be the first time
in 44 Florida executions since capital punishment resumed in 1979
that the inmate bled. Florida is one of four states that use the
electric chair for executions. The executioner is a private citizen
who is paid $150 per execution. State law allows for his or her
identity to remain anonymous.
Do we own our dead body? Allen Lee "Tiny" Davis
was executed in the State of Florida in 1999. After his
electrocution three of Davis dead body's photographs have been
published on Florida's High Court official website. "Whatever is
part of the opinion goes up. We do not censor anything." - said
Craig Waters, a spokesman for the high court. "It's part of the
public record." Are all US public records so carefully illustrated,
or it has some educational preferences in certain cases...
Without any doubt the pictures of electrocuted
Allen Lee "Tiny" have been published to show to the American public
that Florida's "Old Sparky" is working well. Though the real noise
around this photo exhibition was made in order to raise debates on
so-called 'cruelty' of execution on electric chair, as claimed some
court representatives later. (If electrocution is cruel, what is the
option than? To execute the prisoner by a lethal injection?)
This
whole show just proves what sort of horror and hypocrisy reigns in
some US State Administrations. While some wise and not so very wise
politicians manipulate with public opinion on violations of basic
human rights, we never seen a politician come up with an interesting
idea to mention that every human being, no matter what his
background is, has the exclusive rights on his dead body.
May be this could be the most basic human right
if one could own, at least, his dead body. Since the Barbaric
legislation in some US states allow the killing, sorry, the
execution of a criminal in the name of State, may be, Court
officials in those States could avoid using the images of executed
criminals, without the violation of basic human right. The right to
be killed in peace. This right is not written, but should it be
really written? Why not?
Especially, when the killing machine
belongs to the Government. Did Florida's Court officials demand the
right to publish the photographs of the dead body to its direct
owner: Allen Lee "Tiny" Davis? We are not sure. Probably he was
executed for the only purpose - to deliver impressive evidence to
Politicians who eager to illustrate their speeches while they
garantee to fight for the public security.
Let's precise that we do not have preferences or
any particular sympathy for criminals. There is no matter who is the
executed person and what are his crimes, do we like him or do we
hate him. Whatever the brutality of the crime is, the State cannot
take the advantage to send the criminal to the electric chair. "An
eye for an eye" is rather a street rule, it's most probably the rule
of jungle.
When such a rule is taken as a State justice practice,
the State becomes a jungle itself. Looking at photographs of
electrocuted Allen Lee "Tiny" Davis, one cannot feel anything but
hate towards murderers, towards evrything that destroys the life.
The image of murder is horrible.
In the conclusion we would add just one thing -
there are certainly people who get hard on looking at such pictures,
but let's hope that this number of excited people is really low and
that the guys who published theese images are not among those
excited persons. Otherwise we never know who of us will become the
next object of their exotic fantasies.
Who weeps for the
blood of the Weiler family?
Bob Greene - Chicago Tribune
July 14, 1999
Some people were horrified by what happened to Allen Lee Davis last
week.
Davis, 54, was put to death in Florida's electric chair. During his
execution, a spot of blood unexpectedly appeared on his shirt; by
the time the execution was finished, the blood spot had grown to
approximately 8 inches across.
Prison officials later said that the blood came from a simple
nosebleed, and that the blood dripped onto Davis' shirt. But some
witnesses said that the blood seemed to come from Davis' chest area.
All of this was used by some as evidence that putting prisoners to
death--specifically by using the electric chair--is an appalling and
cruel thing to do. The lawyer for another Florida man on Death Row
said, "The degrading and mutilating manner in which (Davis) died was
a clear violation of the Eighth Amendment. Blood gushing from the
face and chest of a dying inmate is repugnant to the conscience of
mankind." Civil liberties attorney Howard Simon said that the method
used to execute Davis was "barbaric."
Perhaps.
But before we go too far down the path of mourning the way in which
Allen Lee Davis died, maybe, just for a few moments, it is worth
reporting something that has not been commented upon much: what
Davis did to get to Death Row in the first place.
On May 11, 1982, Davis--an ex-convict--entered the Jacksonville,
Fla., home of the John Weiler family. Weiler, an executive with the
Westinghouse Corp., was on a business trip in Pittsburgh.
In the Weiler home, Allen Lee Davis attacked Nancy Weiler, 37, who
at the time was three months pregnant with the family's third child.
Davis bludgeoned Mrs. Weiler--who was the corresponding secretary of
the PTA at her children's school--so severely that she was barely
recognizable when police found her body. Davis brutalized Mrs.
Weiler with such force that the trigger guard on the gun with which
he was beating her broke, as did the wooden grips and metal frame of
its handle.
Davis tied up the Weiler's 10-year-old daughter, Kristy--a 5th-grade
student who hoped to become a nuclear engineer someday--and shot her
in the face, killing her.
The Weilers' other child -- 5-year-old Kathy -- tried to run from
Davis. He shot her in the back, and then beat her, crushing her
skull.
There was quite a bit of blood in the Weiler home after Davis had
killed the mother and her two children. Considerably more blood than
inadvertently appeared on Davis' shirt during the execution.
When prisoners are wrongly sent to Death Row, there is justifiable
outrage that the court system could condemn innocent people to
death. This is as it should be. But there was no question about
Allen Lee Davis. He murdered Mrs. Weiler and her two little girls.
No one disputes that.
And for 16 full years the State of Florida housed him, took care of
his physical needs, fed him all the food he desired (he ballooned up
to 344 pound in prison; one of his attorneys based an appeal on the
theory that Davis should not be executed because his obesity might
complicate the electrocution and cause him pain, which the attorney
said would be cruel and unusual punishment. The attorney did not
characterize the extent of the cruelty in the deaths of the Weiler
family.)
As his last meal before his execution, Davis received from the State
of Florida the dinner he had requested: a lobster tail, fried
potatoes, a half-pound of fried shrimp, six ounces of fried clam
strips, half a loaf of garlic bread and 32 ounces of A&W root beer.
In 1982, Davis did not give Mrs. Weiler and her two children a
choice of a last meal before he killed them.
But now the focus is on the blood spot on Davis' chest, and whether
that indicates we are an immoral and vicious society for doing such
a thing to him.
John Weiler--whose wife and daughters have been dead for 17
years--apparently doesn't think so. At one point as he waited for
Davis to at last receive the punishment the courts had ordered for
him, Weiler said: "It is cruel and unusual punishment of the
victims, living and dead, to know that this animal . . . still
breathes."
And now Allen Lee Davis is dead. Evidently his death was a somewhat
unpleasant experience for him. There are a lot of things in this
world for the public to worry about. Davis' discomfort is not
necessarily one of them.
Lawyers attempt to save
man from chair
By Leslei Clark - Miami
Herald
Sunday, July
18, 1999
TALLAHASSEE -- A second
autopsy was performed Saturday on executed triple murderer Allen Lee
Davis as lawyers for condemned courthouse shooter Thomas Provenzano
tried to find a way to keep their client out of the electric chair.
The findings were inconclusive, but Chicago
pathologist Robert Kirschner noted that the burn marks on Davis'
head and right leg body were "less than normal,'' said Martin
McClain, an attorney for Provenzano.
"Generally in an execution, the skin is charred
black,'' McClain said. "Dr. Kirschner said it was not.''
Kirschner wants to look at pictures from the
initial autopsy performed the day of the execution before he reaches
any conclusions, McClain said.
Lawyers for Provenzano, who is scheduled to be
executed Sept. 14 for the shooting death of a bailiff, have charged
that Davis did not receive a big enough jolt of electricity to kill
him instantly.
Kirschner was traveling back to Chicago late
Saturday and could not be reached.
Davis' bloody death July 8 in the electric chair
prompted calls to permanently retire the chair and convinced the
Florida Supreme Court to postpone Provenzano's execution until a
judge determines whether the chair can reliably provide a quick and
painless death.
Department of Corrections officials and Gov. Jeb
Bush have maintained that the chair functioned properly.
Provenzano's attorney last week successfully
blocked Davis' scheduled cremation to conduct the autopsy.
Kirschner is expected to testify at the hearings
on the chair in Orlando July 28-30.
Kirschner also found that Davis' brain was "not
cooked,'' McClain said, leading the pathologist to believe there was
a "potential for brain activity'' and that Davis might have been "functionally
able to feel pain.''
That would be "inconsistent with the state's
notion of instant death,'' McClain said. Prison officials have
testified that the initial 2,300 volts the chair delivers makes for
a quick and painless death.
478 U.S. 1044
Allen Lee DAVIS
v.
Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Secretary, Florida Department of
Corrections, et al
No. A-224
Kenneth Wayne HARDWICK
v.
Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Secretary, Florida Department of
Corrections, et al
No. A-225
Supreme Court of the United States
September 23, 1986
On applications for stay.
The application for stay of execution
of the sentence of death, presented to Justice POWELL
and by him referred to the Court, is granted pending the
timely filing and disposition by this Court of a
petition for writ of certiorari. Should the petition for
a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay terminates
automatically. In the event the petition for writ of
certiorari is granted, this stay shall continue pending
issuance of the mandate of this Court.
Justice POWELL, with whom THE CHIEF
JUSTICE joins, concurring.
Allen Davis and Kenneth Hardwick were
scheduled to be executed on September 23, 1986. On the
morning of September 22, Davis and Hardwick filed habeas
corpus petitions in the Florida Supreme Court, that has
original jurisdiction to issue extraordinary writs under
Fla.Rule App.Proc. 9.030(a)(3). The Florida Court denied
both applications by order, stating in each case that it
would "file an opinion at a later date setting forth its
reasons for the denial of this Petition." At 10:25 p.m.
on that day, less than nine hours before the scheduled
executions, Davis and Hardwick filed applications with
me, as Circuit Justice, seeking stays of execution until
this Court can consider their petitions for writs of
certiorari to review the Florida decisions. The sole
basis for their request is a claim that in Florida
capital punishment is applied discriminatorily on the
basis of the race of the victim. I granted a temporary
stay until September 23 at 3 p.m. and referred the
applications to the full Court.
I
The State asks us to deny the
applications, claiming that Davis and Hardwick were
barred by state law from raising their claims in the
Florida Supreme Court. The State asserts that Davis's
claim was barred because he did not raise it on direct
appeal from his conviction. See Stone v. State, 481
So.2d 478, 479 (Fla.1985). The State also asserts that
Hardwick's claim was filed in the wrong forum. See Ford
v. Wainwright, 451 So.2d 471 ( Fla.1984) (a claim may
not be raised for the first time in original habeas
proceedings in the Florida Supreme Court). According to
the State, Hardwick's claim should have been filed in a
Florida trial court under Fla. Rule Crim.Proc. 3.850.
Davis and Hardwick ask us to ignore these procedural
questions.
We note that Davis filed a habeas
petition last night, September 22, in the federal
district court for the Middle District of Florida
(Black, J .). This morning, that Court denied the
petition and refused to grant a certificate of probable
cause. Judge Black concluded that Davis had abused the
writ by "intentionally delaying the raising of grounds
for relief." 1
Despite this record of unexplained
delay, I concur in the Court's decision to grant these
applications. They now raise claims similar to the issue
presented in Hitchcock v. Wainwright, 476 U.S. ___
(1986) (writ of certiorari granted), to be argued here
on October 15, 1986. No Florida court has specifically
addressed the State's contentions that the claims are
procedurally barred. The Florida Supreme Court decisions
may rest on those grounds, but that Court has not
published an opinion. In the past I have found
procedural bars apparent on the face of a stay
application. See Woodard v. Hutchins, 464 U.S. 377, 378
(1984) (POWELL, J., concurring). I am reluctant to do so
here, however, because the alleged bars depend on an
interpretation of state law. In these applications, I am
unwilling to assume that the Florida Supreme Court
decisions rest on procedural grounds not apparent on the
face of the orders.
II
No explanation has been offered
either by Davis or by Hardwick for waiting more than a
month, and until the eve of the execution date, to
assert the present claims in any court, state or
federal. It is my understanding that the Florida Bar, at
least since 1984, has assured state and federal courts
that it would provide counsel promptly when needed in
capital cases. Although unlikely, it may be that neither
Davis nor Hardwick knew that counsel always were
available. Nor are we informed as to when counsel were
engaged in these cases. In any event, I suggest that
counsel owe this Court a duty to explain why no action
was taken until the day before the execution date,
making it difficult both for the courts below and for
this Court to make the carefully considered judgments so
essential in capital cases. In the future, and here I
can write only for myself, I will expect counsel whose
papers are filed with me as Circuit Justice on the eve
of the execution date, to make an appropriate
explanation. 2 Respect for
this Court, as well as duty to the client, requires no
less. If there has been deliberate or inexcusable delay,
the appropriate Committee of the Florida Bar will be
advised.
Justice REHNQUIST and Justice
O'CONNOR would deny the applications for stay.
Footnotes
[ Footnote 1
] Cf. Habeas Corpus Rule 9(a) (a petition may be
dismissed if the state is "prejudiced in its ability to
respond to the petition by delay in its filing" unless
the petitioner shows that it is based on newly-
discovered grounds).
[ Footnote 2
] Indeed, such an explanation should not be limited
to the period following the setting of an execution
date. As noted above, counsel are made available in
Florida in every capital case. Following conviction and
exhaustion of appeal remedies, counsel have a duty to
proceed with reasonable promptness to pursue state and
federal post-conviction remedies without awaiting the
setting of execution dates.