Richard Glossip

You have often heard me give my thoughts on the death penalty. I believe that in someone is sentenced to death, let alone actually executed, there should be absolutely no question as to whether they are guilty of the crime. Now, some would say that there is no way to come to that conclusion but I do not necessarily believe that. I believe that in most cases DNA can absolutely determine the guilt of someone, at least someone who has physically committed the crime. Of course there are cases in which DNA really makes no difference. Those are the cases in which the defendant's DNA is all over a home and crime scene but then again it is generally their home or property they use on a regular basis. Now, DNA cannot prove the guilt of someone accused of hiring someone else to commit a crime and investigators have to look elsewhere for evidence.

Murder for hire cases can be difficult to prove. I'm currently reading a book on the murder of Dr. John Hill in Texas in 1972. It has long been theorized that his former father in law, Ash Robinson was the person behind his murder and despite other defendants proclaiming this to be true, prosecutors never charged him in the murder, feeling they did not have enough evidence. Most believe that Robinson was never charged because he was a wealthy man with many connections to powerful people. In the same respect people would argue that Richard Glossip was charged because he did not have the same sort of connections.

You have likely seen the videos in which an undercover camera or audio recording proves that someone has enlisted the help of someone else to commit a murder. This most often occurs before the murder is committed and someone involved has contacted the police about the plot that is being planned. Investigators are not always so lucky though in having not just damaging evidence against the mastermind but also preventing a murder. Often in these types of cases they have proof of money changing hands or at the very least that a deal was struck in some way with someone. That does not seem to be the case against Richard Glossip.

In 1997 Richard Glossip was the manager of The Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. The owner of the motel was a man named Barry Van Treese. Van Treese also owned another motel in Tulsa. It is unclear in what condition the Tulsa motel was in but by all account by January of 1997 the Oklahoma City motel is was considered to be “run-down.” Police would later say that many of the rooms were “deplorable” and only half of the rooms were inhabitable. Van Treese's wife would tell authorities that in the last six months of her husband's life he had not been as involved in at least the operation of the Oklahoma City motel as they had both suffered the deaths of their mothers and had been preoccupied. It is unclear what the condition of the motel was prior to that to know if this claim would be legitimate. It seems to me that by the descriptions I have found of the motel it would have taken longer than six months for it to be as bad as described.

There seems to be little dispute that the motel was not making much of a profit for Barry Van Treese. I found an article that stated in December of 1996 an audit was done on the motel and there was allegedly about six thousand dollars missing. However, it does not seems that was ever officially established as a fact. On January 6, 1997 Barry Van Treese was in Oklahoma City and was staying in room 102 of the motel. Richard Glossip also lived on the property in a room with his girlfriend. A third man, nineteen year old Justin Sneed also lived in a room. Sneed was considered to be the maintenance man of the motel but some reports state that he was not a paid employee but was give room and board for his work. A defense attorney for Glossip would claim that at the time Sneed was also a meth addict. So, while Van Treese was Glossip's boss, Glossip was Sneed's boss.

Sometime in the morning of January 7, 1997 Barry Van Treese's wife, Donna had become worried that she had not heard from her husband. At some point the police were called. Authorities went to the motel where they talked to Glossip after Barry's vehicle had been located at a local bank. They would later say that he seemed inconsistent in his responses to them (although I have nothing to show what he said to them) and they conducted a search. Whether they knew what room to look in is unknown. Either way around ten that morning they found their way to Room 102 and discovered the body of Barry Van Treese. He had been beaten to death with an aluminum baseball bat and his body had been stuffed under the bed of the room. Authorities would later say they believed there was a plan to dispose of the body but that the perpetrators had not gotten around to it.

While, as I said, I do not know exactly what the authorities believe was inconsistent with Glossip's comments I can tell you what he has allegedly told authorities and the court since then about that morning. Glossip would tell authorities that he had been awaken about four in the morning by the sound of something “scraping” on the wall. He walked out of his room and discovered Justin Sneed outside Room 102 sporting a black eye. It would later be said that Sneed allegedly confessed to Glossip that he had murdered Van Treese but that Glossip's girlfriend convinced him that he should not tell authorities. It is not clear as to exactly when this revelation came about.

By the time Van Treese's body was found Justin Sneed was already gone from the area and authorities did not have enough to hold Richard Glossip. I cannot exactly say when Sneed was taken into custody, nor can I say exactly when he implicated Glossip in the murder. What I can say is that Justin Sneed apparently fairly quickly admitted that he had murdered Barry Van Treese and at least for several months never mentioned that Richard Glossip was involved. Forensics through fingerprints and DNA both in Room 102 as well as in Barry Van Treese's car would link Sneed to the crime. I have heard nothing to indicate that any evidence pointed to Glossip in any way.

By July of 1997 Sneed had a psych evaluation done where he stated he understood the charges and still had never mentioned Richard Glossip being involved. However, at some point, although I cannot say when, that changed. Eventually Justin Sneed would obtain a plea deal with the prosecutors that would spare him the death penalty. In the agreement Justin Sneed was now saying that Richard Glossip had hired him to murder Van Treese and had promised him seven thousand dollars in return. The agreement included that Sneed must testify against Glossip at his trial and stipulated that he would receive a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Sneed would be sentenced on June 18, 1998.

For his part Glossip continues to maintain his innocence. Prosecutors would allege various reasons for Glossip wanting Van Treese murdered, because it seems that Sneed either never gave them the motive behind the crime, or had given several. It has been alleged that each time Sneed tells his story he adds a little more to Glossip's involvement. That being said the two main motives that the prosecutors pushed at Richard's trials were that he wanted to control both motels owned by Van Treese or that he feared losing his job because the Oklahoma motel was not turning a profit. While the article that spoke of the audit and the alleged missing money seems to indicate the murder could have been committed to hide that crime, I must be fair in stating that I never found anything more on this or that the prosecutors alleged it in any way. Despite having nothing more than the word of an admitted murderer Richard Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death on August 14, 1998.

In 2001 the conviction and sentence for Glossip was overturned when the appeals court unanimously agreed that the prosecutors had an “extremely weak case” against him and that Glossip had not received effective counsel at his trial. Despite this prosecutors took the case to trial once again in August of 2004. While I found nothing that stated it for a fact, it seems that once again Sneed had testified against his former boss. Again Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death. In 2007 the courts affirmed the conviction and sentence although it seems just barely. The conclusion was that two justices affirmed the judgment, one concurred and two dissented.

Over the last decade there have been many appeals in the case made, both officially and unofficially. By unofficially I mean to say that there have been many protests against his conviction. There has been a documentary called Killing Richard Glossip and television shows, such as Dr. Phil have looked into the case. Celebrities such as Sister Helen Prejean, Susan Sarandon (who once played Sister Helen in a movie), Sir Richard Branson and Mark Ruffalo have rallied to Glossip's defense claiming that there is no evidence that he was involved in the murder of Barry Van Treese beyond the words of Justin Sneed. In fact, it seems that even Sneed's family members have written the courts claiming they believe Sneed is lying about Glossip's involvement. Even Sneed's daughter has written a letter claiming that Sneed has stated he would like to recant his story but that he fears that he will receive the death penalty. On top of this at least publicly Sneed is rallying for his own release saying that his honesty should have gotten him released by now.

Currently many states have had issues not only with obtaining the drugs used in lethal injections but also in having courts determine their laws for the death penalty are constitutional. Oklahoma is really no different. Glossip himself filed an appeal surrounding the issue of the three drug protocol that was being used. Well technically the suit had been started by Charles Warner but picked up by Glossip after Warners execution. The suit argued that it violated the 8^th Amendment and constituted cruel and unusual punishment. That appeal was denied in September of 2015. However the following month it had been reported that in January of 2015 the Department of Corrections officials had used potassium acetate in the execution of Charles Warner and that had been against protocol. The paperwork had stated that potassium chloride had been used but an autopsy proved differently. A grand jury investigation was called for and it was said then that executions would be placed on hold for at least a year. As of January of 2018 it was announced that executions would remain on hold “for the foreseeable future.”

It is unclear as to whether Richard Glossip will ever see the execution chamber and it appears that many are fine with this, and I have to agree. It is my belief that no one should be executed if there are any unanswered questions and this case is one great big question mark.