Robin M. Lovitt's execution was commuted by Gov. Mark R. Warner of Virginia. Warner cited the fact that DNA evidence, which test inconclusively at first and then destroyed, would not give Lovitt a fair chance of proving his claim of innocense, thus, life in prison for Lovitt.
As stated by the Washington Post
"In this case, the actions of an agent of the Commonwealth, in a manner contrary to the express direction of the law, comes at the expense of a defendant facing society's most severe and final sanction," Warner said in the statement. "The Commonwealth must ensure that every time this ultimate sanction is carried out, it is done fairly."
Questions for debate:1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?2.)Would you have commuted the sentece?, why or why not?3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?