Warren Lee Hill is not Dumb; He's a Murderer

A thirty-four-year-old Georgia inmate, Joseph Handspike, was murdered in his jail cell bed with a nail-embedded board on Aug. 17, 1990. He made for easy prey while asleep and defenseless. His murderer, and cellmate, Warren Lee Hill, planned it that way. Hill proved himself capable of devising and executing a plan in which he: 1. Waited until the victim was asleep before attacking so as to ensure the full element of surprise; 2. Used a bludgeoning object so as to inflict maximum damage; 3. Turned said bludgeoning object into a lethal weapon by embedding it with nails secured from underneath the cell sink. 4. Struck at the victim with the lethal weapon until he was dead (repeat step 4 as needed). He carried each step out dutifully according to the official report:

In regards to the victim's injuries, a correctional officer testified that the victim was badly beaten in the upper body and face. The victim was bleeding profusely from his wounds, several teeth were knocked out and his left eye was detached from the socket. The victim, who was still conscious, attempted to raise himself and speak to the correctional officer; however, he was unable to speak and had blood pouring from his mouth.

In an environment with very limited resources, Hill's planning showed he possessed a certain capacity for ingenuity, patience, and resolve -- along with a strong desire to kill his fellow man. Hill clearly demonstrated that he was someone who not only was capable of making decisions, but capable of formulating a plan, setting goals, and organizing his faculties long enough to see that goal carried out.

Does this make Warren Lee Hill a normal person? Absolutely not. Does it prove he is an untutored Einstein? Not hardly. But it does show he has intelligence, a basic acumen that suggests the mental capacity of one who is intellectually adequate. In other words, he's not dumb. He's a murderer in the 1st degree. This exactly how the state of Georgia sees it, too, and being a state that has capital punishment law, Hill stands to be executed.
However, his legal defense -- and his liberal supporters -- argue that poor old Hill is so subnormal that he is incapable of planning or controlling his actions. Why, he's no different than a bad baby who might bonk his sister over the head with a plastic bat. The problem, of course, is that Hill is not a baby. He's a bad man who was already serving a life sentence for killing his girlfriend, Myra Wright, by shooting her 11 times at the time he bludgeoned and impaled Handspike to death.

Those who are against the death penalty are using Hill's case to show how barbaric our criminal system is. They maintain that Hill is "intellectually disabled" or moronic, according to an evaluation conducted by a handful of doctors, who beforehand had all agreed Hill that was intellectually normal. Then there is the fact that Hill is black, and Georgia is a Southern state. These points allow liberals to twist and turn and fake outrage, while, of course, mentioning nothing about the crime or the victims.

In fact, one liberal, Ian Millhiser, writing for the very liberal site Think Progress, actually claims "Hill's death sentence is rooted in unreliable evidence that has since been overcome by new information..." What new information has been dug up? What new evidence is more reliable than the old? Was the brain-spattered board planted in Hill's hands by the real killer? Was the prison guard hallucinating? Did Handspike use the nail-impaled board to beat his own eye out of its socket?

The answer is none of the above. Millhiser is using the doctors' change of heart in which they all recanted their earlier testimony that Hill was intellectually normal, and now find him to be mentally retarded. According to Millhiser, the doctors' recantation proves Hill did not murder Handspike. In fact, Millhiser never mentions Hill's crimes, it is as if they never occurred. Millhiser does, however, mention, over and over, that some states desire to "make it easier to kill people" as opposed to the thought that some states wish to make murdering someone a highly undesirable enterprise.

This is lost to liberals like Millhiser. They are too busy claiming Hill is a victim. They ask, "Does Hill deserve execution?" They never ask, "Did Joseph Handspike and the young lady deserve to be cold-bloodedly murdered?"

Lost on this sweetheart and millions like him is that states have an obligation to protect their citizens. They also have an obligation to see that justice is carried out, and that certain punishments fit the crime. In this case, a man already serving a life sentence for the killing of a human being was convicted of brutally killing another one. Through these unspeakable actions, Hill forfeited his claim at being considered one's fellow man and citizen. He had no use for society and now society has no use for him.

Hill may be a lot of things -- a cold blooded killer, a homicidal maniac, but he isn't dumb. He is a murderer.

A thirty-four-year-old Georgia inmate, Joseph Handspike, was murdered in his jail cell bed with a nail-embedded board on Aug. 17, 1990. He made for easy prey while asleep and defenseless. His murderer, and cellmate, Warren Lee Hill, planned it that way. Hill proved himself capable of devising and executing a plan in which he: 1. Waited until the victim was asleep before attacking so as to ensure the full element of surprise; 2. Used a bludgeoning object so as to inflict maximum damage; 3. Turned said bludgeoning object into a lethal weapon by embedding it with nails secured from underneath the cell sink. 4. Struck at the victim with the lethal weapon until he was dead (repeat step 4 as needed). He carried each step out dutifully according to the official report:

In regards to the victim's injuries, a correctional officer testified that the victim was badly beaten in the upper body and face. The victim was bleeding profusely from his wounds, several teeth were knocked out and his left eye was detached from the socket. The victim, who was still conscious, attempted to raise himself and speak to the correctional officer; however, he was unable to speak and had blood pouring from his mouth.

In an environment with very limited resources, Hill's planning showed he possessed a certain capacity for ingenuity, patience, and resolve -- along with a strong desire to kill his fellow man. Hill clearly demonstrated that he was someone who not only was capable of making decisions, but capable of formulating a plan, setting goals, and organizing his faculties long enough to see that goal carried out.

Does this make Warren Lee Hill a normal person? Absolutely not. Does it prove he is an untutored Einstein? Not hardly. But it does show he has intelligence, a basic acumen that suggests the mental capacity of one who is intellectually adequate. In other words, he's not dumb. He's a murderer in the 1st degree. This exactly how the state of Georgia sees it, too, and being a state that has capital punishment law, Hill stands to be executed.
However, his legal defense -- and his liberal supporters -- argue that poor old Hill is so subnormal that he is incapable of planning or controlling his actions. Why, he's no different than a bad baby who might bonk his sister over the head with a plastic bat. The problem, of course, is that Hill is not a baby. He's a bad man who was already serving a life sentence for killing his girlfriend, Myra Wright, by shooting her 11 times at the time he bludgeoned and impaled Handspike to death.

Those who are against the death penalty are using Hill's case to show how barbaric our criminal system is. They maintain that Hill is "intellectually disabled" or moronic, according to an evaluation conducted by a handful of doctors, who beforehand had all agreed Hill that was intellectually normal. Then there is the fact that Hill is black, and Georgia is a Southern state. These points allow liberals to twist and turn and fake outrage, while, of course, mentioning nothing about the crime or the victims.

In fact, one liberal, Ian Millhiser, writing for the very liberal site Think Progress, actually claims "Hill's death sentence is rooted in unreliable evidence that has since been overcome by new information..." What new information has been dug up? What new evidence is more reliable than the old? Was the brain-spattered board planted in Hill's hands by the real killer? Was the prison guard hallucinating? Did Handspike use the nail-impaled board to beat his own eye out of its socket?

The answer is none of the above. Millhiser is using the doctors' change of heart in which they all recanted their earlier testimony that Hill was intellectually normal, and now find him to be mentally retarded. According to Millhiser, the doctors' recantation proves Hill did not murder Handspike. In fact, Millhiser never mentions Hill's crimes, it is as if they never occurred. Millhiser does, however, mention, over and over, that some states desire to "make it easier to kill people" as opposed to the thought that some states wish to make murdering someone a highly undesirable enterprise.

This is lost to liberals like Millhiser. They are too busy claiming Hill is a victim. They ask, "Does Hill deserve execution?" They never ask, "Did Joseph Handspike and the young lady deserve to be cold-bloodedly murdered?"

Lost on this sweetheart and millions like him is that states have an obligation to protect their citizens. They also have an obligation to see that justice is carried out, and that certain punishments fit the crime. In this case, a man already serving a life sentence for the killing of a human being was convicted of brutally killing another one. Through these unspeakable actions, Hill forfeited his claim at being considered one's fellow man and citizen. He had no use for society and now society has no use for him.

Hill may be a lot of things -- a cold blooded killer, a homicidal maniac, but he isn't dumb. He is a murderer.