Texas is set to execute Richard Lee Tabler on February 13th, 2025, for the two double murders of Mohamed-Amine Rahmouni, Haitham Frank Zayed, Amanda Benefield, and Tiffany Loraine Dotson.

An interpersonal conflict between Richard and Mohamed had set off a chain reaction in February 2004. First, Richard lured Mohamed and Haitham into a parking lot, where he fatally shot them both. Two days later, in fear of being found out, Richard shot Amanda and Tiffany, whom he believed would implicate him in the crime. Richard confessed to both murders in writing and a videotaped statement.

At trial, the evidence presented by the defense included testimony from Richard’s family detailing his difficult childhood, accidents, birth trauma, and other conditions which may have inadvertently contributed to the killings. Most significantly, however, the defense presented the testimony of several mental health experts to corroborate these statements and add further clarification.

First, a clinical neuropsychologist found evidence of an abnormality in Richard's left frontal temporal lobe. Our temporal lobes significantly affect our ability to process language, emotions, memories, and social cues. Any damage, however small, can lead to impulsivity, depression, apathy, and reduced social awareness.

This abnormality in Richard’s brain was confirmed again by a psychiatrist who had conducted multiple interviews with Richard, as well as a thorough review of his social, educational, medical, and criminal history. Based on her analysis, she confirmed a prior diagnosis of ADHD, as well as Borderline Personality Disorder and Bipolar Disorder. While both conditions can result in severe mood swings and impulsivity, untreated Bipolar is particularly dangerous because there is an increased likelihood of psychosis. It is important to note that Richard has been treated for hallucinations and delusions many times throughout his stay in prison.

The prosecution presented a rebuttal in the form of testimony from forensic psychologist Dr Richard Coons who has testified in over 150 capital cases. His role was to determine whether Richard would pose any future danger to society. Future dangerousness is a key factor in determining whether someone gets a life or death sentence. Dr. Coons believed that Richard did not suffer from any of the conditions above but rather Antisocial Personality Disorder, a condition commonly described as ‘psychopathy’ or ‘sociopathy’. He argued that this condition did not lessen Richard’s criminal culpability because ASPD does not compel people to commit criminal acts; they choose to do so because ‘they lack conscience’. In 2010, The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that Dr. Coons’ methodology in determining the future dangerousness of capital defendants was entirely unreliable and without any scientific basis. He used his arbitrary standards and personal convictions to determine whether someone lacked conscience and would be a danger to society. In 2023, Texas executed Brett Brewer, another victim of Dr. Coons’ unreliable testimony.

Although the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of a person who suffers from ‘insanity’ or severe mental illness, the test used to determine insanity is exceptionally strict. Hence, people like Richard often slip through the cracks of our justice system. It is not enough to show a life-long history of mitigating circumstances. It is not enough to show that Richard continues to suffer from episodes of psychosis. For the Amendment to apply, Richard would have to show that his concept of reality is so impaired that he cannot grasp the meaning and purpose of his execution or the link between his crime and punishment.

Richard’s case was made even more complicated when his former defence attorneys refused to represent him at a critical hearing that was set to determine whether he had the capacity to waive his right to a habeas corpus. Habeas corpus is a type of post-conviction remedy for prisoners who want to show that their detention violates their federal rights, including their right to effective counsel, per the Sixth Amendment. During the hearing, Richard waived his right to a habeas corpus, but the court failed to inform him of the relevant period that would make this decision final and irrevocable. Due to the attorneys’ failure to participate and present critical evidence, the court was unaware of Richard’s capacity to waive this right.

In 2023, the Texas House of Representatives passed legislation in an attempt to halt the death penalty for mentally ill defendants. House Bill 727 wanted to stop the deaths of those who have severe mental illnesses, such as Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective Disorder, or Bipolar Disorder. Unfortunately, the bill failed to make it out of the chamber. Its existence, however, shows that some in Texas recognise the weight we carry when we allow the State to execute the vulnerable.

Represented by ACLU Capital Punishment Project

The following information is from the ACLU, which has recently represented Mr. Tabler. The ACLU Capital Punishment Project's petition was denied by the US Supreme Court in October. It is unclear if there will be subsequent filings.

In Tabler v. Lumpkin, the ACLU represents a Texas death row prisoner whose lawyers refused to represent him at a hearing to determine his capacity to decide whether to give up his state post-conviction appeals, leaving him effectively unrepresented at that hearing. Our petition asks the Supreme Court to review Richard Tabler’s case and to hold that when a defendant’s lawyers abandon him, his waiver of further appeals should not bar his access to federal habeas corpus review of the constitutionality of his conviction.

The federal writ of habeas corpus provides a remedy for state prisoners who can show that they are in custody in violation of their federal rights, including the right to effective assistance of counsel at trial. Federal courts, however, out of respect for state courts’ procedures, will not grant relief if the state courts denied the claim because a petitioner did not comply with a state procedural rule.

Texas death row prisoner Richard Tabler asked a federal court for a new penalty trial because he received ineffective assistance from his trial lawyers. The federal court, however, refused to hear his claim because he had dropped his litigation of the same claim in state court. But Mr. Tabler, who suffers from severe mental impairments, dropped his state appeals in a hearing at which his appointed lawyers refused to participate, leaving him without legal representation.

Our petition asks the Supreme Court to decide whether Mr. Tabler’s abandonment by his attorneys at a key hearing should “excuse” his non-compliance with a state procedural rule, and thus allow the federal court to review his federal claim: that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.

The ACLU Petition was DENIED on Oct 7, 2024, opening the door for an execution date to be set.

Texas' aggressive execution schedule marks it as an outlier in its use of the death penalty while the majority of other states are on a downward trend of executions. In the last few years, Texas has been one of only a handful of states that have carried out death sentences - and it continues to do so targeting the poor, the mentally ill and people of color.

Please sign the petition asking Governor Abbott and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to do everything within their power to stop this execution, including issuing a stay, and seeking a path to clemency in the case.

Additionally, you may reach out now to the Board at bpp-pio@tdcj.texas.gov and the Governor at https://gov.texas.gov/contact/and (512) 463-1782. You can simply leave a voice message, or choose to speak to a representative if you prefer.

Please note: In Texas, the Governor does have limited power when it comes to the death penalty. But the story we are told that "it's out of the governor's hands," is only true if we allow it to be. Yes, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles must recommend clemency in that state in order for the Governor to grant clemency (mercy) by commuting a death sentence. But the fact is that the governor appoints the members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. He can choose to appoint members who will take valid claims and concerns more seriously, instead of acting like rubber-stamping gate-keepers. He can still use his position of power and influence to enact justice in the State of Texas