Blair County District Attorney’s office supports stay in second-degree murder appeal
Office would not object to stay in case in wake of Top Court’s ruling
Trending
A former Altoona man serving two life terms for the murders and robbery of an elderly Altoona couple in 2002 has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court asking that his convictions and sentences be vacated.
While the Blair County District Attorney's office opposes the petition filed by 45-year-old William Darwin Thompson, the response filed this week indicated it would not object to a stay in the federal case due to a recent ruling that questioned the constitutionality of the statute under which Thompson was sentenced.
The response, filed by Assistant District Attorney Julia B. Wilt, stated the prosecution is asking that Thompson's federal habeas corpus petition be denied, but, alternatively, based on emerging case law in Pennsylvania courts, the DA's office "is not opposed to stay and abeyance of (the federal court's) decision on issues raised in the matter," Wilt stated.
The response pointed out that in a decision issued by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on March 26, mandatory life-without-parole sentences imposed for
second-degree murder violate the Pennsylvania Constitution's prohibition against the imposition of cruel punishment.
Thompson, who is incarcerated in the State Correctional Institution in Houtzdale, was sentenced to terms of life in prison without parole on July 26, 2007, for the stabbing deaths of Raymond, 83, and Majorie, 81, Bracken, who lived on Spruce Avenue.
Thompson was charged with their murders that occurred during a nighttime robbery.
He was linked to the murders by items including a telephone from the Bracken home and a ring with a green stone, identified as Raymond Bracken's, that Thompdon brought to the home of a former girlfriend.
In addition to the two life terms, he was sentenced to a consecutive sentence of 20 to 40 years for robbery.
Since his conviction and sentence, Thompson has filed multiple appeals, which have been rejected at the state level.
Thompson has consistently maintained he did not commit the murders, yet ongoing investigations over the years have failed to identify and prosecute any alleged accomplices.
In his federal appeal, Thompson claims his trial attorney failed to place on the stand a person, who, it is alleged, could have provided him with an alibi for the supposed time the deaths occurred.
He indicates in his federal petition his attorney failed to call a witness who saw another man -- not Thompson -- who was in the area where the murders occurred and who was acting suspiciously that night.
He charges that the prosecution withheld discovery information including a plea deal for a witness and x-rays of the victims taken during the autopsy.
Also, the first attempt to try Thompson ended in a mistrial with the accusation that information was withheld by the prosecution, thus exposing Thompson to double jeopardy.
Addressing another issue, Thompson charges a violation by his attorney of improperly divulging defense information to the prosecution.
Finally, he challenges the testimony by former Blair County Coroner Patricia Ross as to the time of death.
Wilt explains in her response that many of the issues raised by Thompson's federal petition were dismissed because of "lack of merit."
Other issues he raises need to be heard in the state court before they can be presented in federal court, Wilt noted.
Also in her response, Wilt emphasized that a witness who testified for the prosecution during Thompson's trial has now indicated in a letter that police unduly pressured her.
"They kept confusing me with the questions they were asking, which was causing me to lie on their behalf against William. They kept telling me they had 100,000 percent proof against him, which in fact they didn't," she stated in her letter, written on Aug. 14.
Wilt mentioned the letter in her response.
To further complicate the Thompson case, the Supreme Court delayed the imposition of its finding that life without parole for second-degree murder violates the Pennsylvania Constitution for 90 days, thus giving the Pennsylvania General Assembly time to consider how to address the situation.
The legislative body has yet to respond.
Thompson is one of an estimated 1,100 state prison inmates serving life without parole for second-degree murder.
The Supreme Court just a week ago agreed to hear a case that will determine if the ruling will be retroactive, or applying to older cases like Thompson's.
"The constitutional right newly recognized ... and the pending retroactivity issue, are presently developing in state courts. There is a possibility that (Thompson) may be eligible for relief on the issue of his mandatory life sentences under developing Pennsylvania law.
"The recent changes regarding second-degree murder sentencing should provide a good cause for stay and abeyance in this case," Wilt concluded.