By Audrey Sawyer
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK – The Oklahoma Board of Pardons and Parole voted 3-2 this week to recommend that Phillip Hancock’s death sentence be commuted—Hancock is due to be executed Nov. 30.
At the hearing, the board heard from Republican State Representatives Kevin McDugle and Justin Humphrey as well as others, who explained Hancock should never have been prosecuted under the death penalty and his execution would be a grievous injustice.
The Board’s recommendation now goes to Gov. Kevin Stitt for a final clemency decision.
Shawn Nolan, one of Hancock’s attorneys, said, “We are very heartened by the Board’s recognition that Phillip Hancock was fighting for his life when this tragic incident occurred and should never have been sentenced to death in the first place. We hope Gov. Stitt will adopt the Board’s recommendation and commute Phil’s death sentence since this is a clear case of self-defense.”
Hancock’s lead trial attorney has acknowledged in a sworn declaration that he was battling drug and alcohol addiction while representing Hancock, and that his co-counsel was similarly dealing with alcoholism.
The lawyer says he is “haunted” by the inadequacy of his representation of Hancock and his recognition that he failed to do the work needed to ensure the jury understood that Hancock was fighting for his life at Jett’s (one of the two victims he shot) house.
Hancock was prosecuted by an Oklahoma City District Attorney’s Office that was still marked by the win-at-any-cost culture of Bob Macy, who was run out of office during the period between the incident at Jett’s house and Hancock’s trial, said the defense.
The bipartisan Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission pointed to the overreach and misconduct of the Macy era, which continued under his successor, in making its 2017 recommendations for reforming Oklahoma’s death penalty system.
The original trial jury foreperson has signed a sworn statement saying that she has come to question her verdict based on information not presented at trial.
A piece of additional clarification for the self-defense claim includes a declaration by Hancock’s trial lawyer, John Coyle, admitting he was experiencing a relapse of drug and alcohol addiction while representing Hancock and did not effectively handle the case.
“I am embarrassed by the job I did on this case,” said Coyle. “I did not do all that I could and should have done. I believed we could easily show that Phil was justified in his fear-driven reaction to Jett’s sudden temper, Jett’s threats, while armed, to put him in a cage, and Jett beating him with a metal tool, and to Lynch’s subsequent attack on Phil.”
Coyle added his co-counsel was also an alcoholic who was dealing with personal problems, and both of them mishandled Hancock’s case.
In particular, Coyle acknowledges failing to show that eyewitness Shawn Tarp had changed her testimony from the preliminary hearing, where she had said Jett hit Hancock in the head with the metal bar, just as Hancock himself testified.
Another statement that was not presented to his jury and that corroborates his self-defense claim was shown in a declaration from Hancock’s ex-girlfriend, Kathy Quick, who admitted, said the defense, she had arranged to lure Hancock to his house to be “taken care of” because she was angry that Hancock disapproved of her drug use.
This, claims the defense, corroborates Hancock’s testimony expressing the belief that Quick set up the attack, which the trial prosecutors portrayed as false and used to undermine Hancock’s credibility.
The petition also points to numerous items of biological evidence that, if tested for DNA, could further support Hancock’s self-defense claim. The petition reveals that after Hancock requested DNA testing, the lead detective on the case submitted his own request to have the evidence tested, but the testing appears never to have been done.
Further, while the jury heard some evidence of Hancock’s background, it was not told the full extent of his trauma history, including multiple sexual assaults he suffered as an adolescent. A new expert report by Dr. Katherine Porterfield explains how Hancock’s lifetime of physical and psychological trauma affected his reaction to Jett’s attack.
In addition, charged the defense, the facts of the case indicate that Jett (armed with a handgun and two knives while high on methamphetamines) attacked Hancock with a metal bar before ordering him to get into a cage. Jett stayed near the living room.
The defense claims Hancock shot Bob Jett and his fellow outlaw biker James Lynch using Jett’s gun, having managed to get it away from Jett as he was being attacked.
Hancock has an outstanding institutional record during nearly 20 years on death row. A former correctional officer, who believes strongly in capital punishment, attests to Hancock’s non-violent nature and says he does not warrant the death penalty.
On Oct. 19, Hancock submitted his clemency petition to the Oklahoma Board of Pardons and Parole. The petition is available here.
Oct. 19 also saw Rep. McDugle and Rep. Humphrey speak in support of clemency for Hancock at a press conference at the State Capitol.
In nearly 20 years on death row, argues the defense, Hancock has a record of excellent behavior particularly echoed by former prison staff who interacted with him when they worked on death row.
The defense states Hancock’s petition is supported by the declaration of the jury foreperson, who said the jury should have heard evidence of Jett’s and Lynch’s gang status and violent reputations, the fact that Hancock was lured to Jett’s house, and information about how Hancock’s trauma history affected his response to being attacked.
The juror explained she now believes Hancock was attacked and initially acted in self-defense, but adopted the prosecution’s narrative that he “flipped to an aggressor” before firing the fatal shots.
While the juror said supports capital punishment, she believes that Hancock “is a human being who deserved to have a fair shot with all of the facts on the table.”
Jett and Lynch were well known to be involved in violent motorcycle gangs, forced prostitution, and selling methamphetamine, claims the defense in its filings, and said Jett kept a large cage in his living room, which he used to torture people, the defense maintains.
On the night of April 26, 201, Jett summoned Hancock to his house under the false pretense of needing to pick up his troubled ex-girlfriend Kathy Quick. Quick has now admitted that she promised to pay Jett to harm Hancock, or in her words, “take care of him.” Quick was angry with Hancock because he did not approve of her shooting up methamphetamine, said the defense.
Hancock arrived at Jett’s house unarmed. Jett’s friend, James Lynch, was also there, and later Jett’s romantic acquaintance, Shawn Tarp, arrived. Jett, who was high on methamphetamine, was working on a motorcycle in the living room and became increasingly agitated.
The defense argues, after receiving a phone call, Jett began gathering his belongings, including a gun, which he loaded and tucked into his pants alongside two knives. Allegedly becoming enraged over an open cigarette pack, Jett ordered Hancock to get in the cage and threatened him with a large metal bar. The cage was large enough to hold a person, and, in fact, Jett was known to drug and force women into the cage before raping them.
Hancock, the defense writes, believed going into the cage “equaled death.” Jett swung the metal tool at Hancock and again said, “I told you to get in the f**king cage,” this time in a louder and angrier voice. Tarp, the only witness to the incident, testified for the prosecution that Jett “wasn’t kidding.”
Jett, the defense adds, then bludgeoned Hancock with the metal tool, while Lynch, who weighed 300 pounds, sacked Hancock and held him in a chokehold on the living room couch. Hancock managed to wrest Jett’s gun away and shot both Jett and Lynch. Jett ran out of the living room, and Lynch fell to the floor, releasing his hold on Hancock.
The defense story notes Hancock heard a noise in one of the bedrooms and thought it was Jett getting a gun. Hancock knew he had to get out of the house and saw the back door was open. But when he stepped outside, he unexpectedly encountered Jett in the dark backyard and fired again.
Hancock, in the defense version, then left Jett’s house but not before seeing Tarp and assuring her that he was not going to hurt her, and fearing retaliation from Jett and Lynch’s motorcycle gang associates, Hancock fled the scene and did not go to the hospital or police.
The Board and Gov. Stitt can consider all of the evidence the jury never heard.
As Hancock’s clemency petition explains, “even the State acknowledges that if Mr. Hancock’s account is accurate, this is a clear-cut case of self-defense.”
Hancock is still seeking to conduct DNA testing, and has been impeded by procedural barriers from obtaining judicial review of many of the problems in his case, noted the defense, stating the Board and the governor can take into account the wealth of newly available evidence that shows Hancock has been telling the truth all along.
