iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Teresa Lewis, Mentally Disabled Woman, To Be Executed In Virginia This Month

First Posted: 09/07/10 08:09 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:35 PM ET

Teresa Lewis

Teresa Lewis, a borderline mentally retarded woman charged with "masterminding" the murder of her husband and stepson in 2002, is slated to be the first woman in almost a century to be executed in Virginia this month.

Lewis, 40, pleaded guilty to hiring two men, Matthew Shallenberger and Rodney Fuller, to murder her husband and stepson so that she could collect a $350,000 life insurance policy. Both triggermen were handed life sentences, but Judge Charles Strauss gave Lewis the death penalty, reasoning that she was "clearly the head of this serpent."

Since the 2002 verdict, new evidence about Lewis and the gunmen has emerged that raises questions about whether she was fairly sentenced and whether, after already having lost one appeal, the Supreme Court should reopen her case. Lewis took two IQ tests after the trial, one by her own expert and one by the state's expert, and she scored 73 and 70 on them, respectively. An intelligence quotient below 70 qualifies as mentally retarded according to the Supreme Court, and Lewis' tests placed her in the "borderline intellectual functioning" zone.

Three different forensic psychology experts also testified that Lewis had "dependent personality disorder," making it difficult for her to carry out functions as simple as making a grocery list without the support of another person.

And in 2003, Shallenberger wrote in a letter to a fellow inmate that he had deliberately manipulated Lewis into going along with his plan because he needed the money to start a drug business in New York City.

"I met Teresa at the Walmart in Danville, VA. From the moment I met her I knew she was someone who could be easily manipulated," Shallenberger wrote. "Killing Julian and Charles Lewis was entirely my idea. I needed money, and Teresa was an easy target."

Three years later, Shallenberger committed suicide in prison, and Lewis' defense team has not yet been able to use the letter as evidence to a court.

Lynn Litchfield, Teresa's chaplain at the maximum-security prison in Virginia where she was confined, describes Lewis in a recent Newsweek article as "slow and overly eager to please -- an easy mark, in other words, for a con."

"She didn't look like a remorseless killer, a 'mastermind' who plotted two murders, as the judge put it," Litchfield writes. "In one of our sessions, she collapsed into great soul-shattering, body-heaving sobs and cried into my wrist, the only part of me I could get through the slot in the door."

Lewis' pro bono defense lawyer, James Rocap, told HuffPost that Lewis' behavior on death row has been exemplary and that he hopes Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) will consider that when he reviews her petition for clemency.

"This is one of the better examples of what is wrong with the death penalty," he said. "Up until October of 2002, Teresa had no record of any violent conduct at all. Since she went to prison, she has been not only a model prisoner, but she has a huge amount of remorse and has developed a prison ministry under very harsh conditions. She can't recreate with anyone, she can't hold anyone's hand, play cards with anyone, and so on. Because of the death penalty in Virginia, we have a remarkable individual who did not have any violent record at all being judged on her participation in one event in one day of her life."

Rocap said he took on Lewis' case in 2004 because he believes the U.S. justice system is flawed regarding the death penalty.

"The legal system for the most serious sanction you can possibly have doesn't operate well," he said. "There is so much serendipity in what happens to people who do the same thing or even worse things than other people. There's so much inconsistency in who gets executed and who doesn't. I think it's important for the legal profession that we provide the most legal representation we can for people who are in danger of losing their lives."

The United States is counted among the countries with the highest numbers of executions in the world, along with China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Congo, Egypt and Iraq, and, barring intervention by McDonnell or the U.S. Supreme Court, Lewis will be added to the tally on Sept. 23.

Rocap, in the meantime, is not going to give up on defending her.

"Teresa is a terrific candidate for clemency, and we hope the Governor sees it that way," he said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Teresa Lewis, a borderline mentally retarded woman charged with "masterminding" the murder of her husband and stepson in 2002, is slated to be the first woman in almost a century to be executed in Vir...
Teresa Lewis, a borderline mentally retarded woman charged with "masterminding" the murder of her husband and stepson in 2002, is slated to be the first woman in almost a century to be executed in Vir...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,121
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (60 total)
10:13 AM on 09/24/2010
Why was my post censored because I said I had a family member who was murdered by a hired hitman?
09:57 PM on 09/24/2010
Because lefties get censorship and free speech confused.
photo
alongst
too often denied to speak
05:05 AM on 09/25/2010
Oh, they're all for free speech- as long as you agree with them.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EGM80
09:52 AM on 09/24/2010
I'm against the death penalty except in extreme circumstances, but if this woman didn't deserve to die because she was so mentally ill, why would she deserve to be in jail for the rest of her life? Either you're well enough to accept the consequences of your actions or you aren't. If she was too dumb or mentally ill with her disorders to survive in the real world without committing huge crimes, she should have been put in a mental hospital rather than a jail. If not, then she must be responsible for the consequences of her actions. Why the men did not receive the punishment is beyond me, but that's why I'm generally against the death penalty - it's application is unfair, particularly against the poor and minorities.

I have a family member with an IQ of about 80 and while life isn't easy for him, he isn't malicious. You can be smart or dumb and be evil, dumb just means you're more likely to get caught.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:50 AM on 09/24/2010
I can't understand why they couldn't have made her sentence life in prison, rather than executing her. What a tragedy. I believe that even those with her IQ should be held accountable for their actions. I've worked with developmentally disabled people and if she herself had committed the direct crime of murder, I'd feel differently but I can completely imagine how a person with her limited mental capacity could be worked over by a clever con man. How sad.
photo
rkreyn
Discipline - bridge between goals & accomplishment
09:26 AM on 09/24/2010
A headline like this is what makes me sick about liberal democrats. What about these people:

"Lewis, 40, pleaded guilty to hiring two men, Matthew Shallenberger and Rodney Fuller, to murder her husband and stepson so that she could collect a $350,000 life insurance policy."

They don't get a headline anyplace!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
plegal06
09:53 AM on 09/24/2010
Killing of other human beings is a sin before God. THY SHALT NOT KILL
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
plegal06
09:55 AM on 09/24/2010
You just saw that black baby and judged.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slightly to the left of John Lennon
09:26 AM on 09/24/2010
Looks like Bjorngaard's comments were scrubbed. (I am anti-moderation, but if ever censorship had justification, his was it!)

Here's my would-be response to his last spewm:

1) spelling errors are not a sign of IQ
2) I did not call you a race-baiter
3) it IS H8ful and offensive to try and define people of color as being d'umb. For example, Oprah Winfrey has an IQ of 136, and Barrack Obama's is 166 - 170.
4) it is difficult to imagine that there are people with lower IQ's than replublican women, such as Palin, Brewer, Angle, and Bachmann
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OldeTymeLiberalDude
09:24 AM on 09/24/2010
"I have yet to see a death case among the dozen coming to the Supreme Court on eve-of-execution stay applications in which the defendant was well represented at trial... People who are well represented at trial do not get the death penalty."
-Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Supreme Court Justice
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Savage Saint Roger
Card Carrying Liberal
09:08 AM on 09/24/2010
I bet this took the Texacutioner back to happier times!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:58 AM on 09/24/2010
Why all the push to continually damn Teresa Lewis?

Because she pulled the trigger? She didn't.
Because she thought up the idea by herself? The letter from Shallenberger says she didn't.
Because she was the smartest of the bunch? She wasn't.
Because she got all the money? She didn't.
Because she got the fairest representation? Clearly she didn't.
Because she had a criminal history? She didn't, but the shooters did.
Because the other two men got the death penalty also? They didn't.
Because she had a low IQ score? Seems like it.
Because the victims were her family? Probably.
Because she understood everything that was going on and all the consequences? Most likely not.
Because she plead guilty, perhaps because she didn't understand her legal rights and had remorse? Probably.
Because she figured out how to manipulate everyone, including two IQ tests? Really really unlikely.
Because a life sentence wasn't enough for this woman? It was for the other men.
Because maybe some people feel that women are untrustworthy, and some others are afraid or mistrusting of disability? Sounds like it.

If prisoners are to be executed, it must be done with absolute parity and care that all people killed by the state are killed fairly. That's the most troubling statement.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
magginkat
12:44 PM on 09/25/2010
"If prisoners are to be executed, it must be done with absolute parity and care that all people killed by the state are killed fairly. That's the most troubling statement."

Personally I feel that there is no such thing as being "killed fairly". Killing is killing no matter who does it.
mrmikes
music saved me
08:13 AM on 09/24/2010
It sounds like her lawyer was professional borderline mentally retarded. Who works a plea deal where the death penalty is involved?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slightly to the left of John Lennon
08:12 AM on 09/24/2010
We celebrate "the right to life", and also "k'ill the bad guys". Even if they are re ta rd ed.

Not to minimize the loss of life her victims suffered, and the pain an horror their loved ones suffered, and are still suffering. My heart goes out to them.

Still, I question the wisdom of executions. "T'it for tat" does not bring the victims back. What it does do, is put blood on the hands of our "civilized" society.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RIGHTmama
08:02 AM on 09/24/2010
This "remarkable" woman has been judged by her peers and has been sentenced by a judge. She has already LOST one appeal. There is a reason for that.
Let's see ... she was smart enough to understand that if her husband were dead that she could collect $350,000, that if she qualified as mentally disabled she would qualify for some sort leniency on her sentence SHE TOOK THESE TESTS AFTER THE TRIAL, NOT BEFORE. It doesn't take a genius to know that if you don't pass that test that an "intelligence quotient below 70 qualifies as mentally retarded according to the Supreme Court".
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
UpstateNY
09:26 AM on 09/24/2010
I don't know if she is remarkable but I know she is human and we don't have the right to kill her. 
photo
alongst
too often denied to speak
05:07 AM on 09/25/2010
And she didn't have the right to kill her husband and his son....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RIGHTmama
08:01 AM on 09/24/2010
So my post reminding liberals of their double standard when it comes to life keeps getting shot down, it is so sad how Huffpost only censors conservative posters.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slightly to the left of John Lennon
08:32 AM on 09/24/2010
I'm getting your posts, in duplicate. What is it that they won't post?
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
UpstateNY
09:29 AM on 09/24/2010
If you're talking about being pro-choice and anti- death penalty.  I am such a 'liberal'.  I don't presume to know 'when life begins', but I know this woman is human.  I respect life, we can put her in jail for her crimes, we don't have the 'right' to kill her. 

If you are pro- death penalty and anti-choice, you should be reminded of the double standard because that makes NO sense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RIGHTmama
07:59 AM on 09/24/2010
This "remarkable" woman has been judged by her peers and has been sentenced by a judge. She has already LOST one appeal. There is a reason for that.
Let's see ... she was smart enough to understand that if her husband were dead that she could collect $350,000, that if she qualified as mentally disabled she would qualify for some sort leniency on her sentence SHE TOOK THESE TESTS AFTER THE TRIAL, NOT BEFORE. It doesn't take a genius to know that if you don't pass that test that an "intelligence quotient below 70 qualifies as mentally retarded according to the Supreme Court".
It is always amazing to me how the liberal mind works, this woman deserves to live, but a completely innocent fetus being ripped from its mothers womb at 24 weeks gestation is someone's right, is lawful, and is justifiable.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kel
08:11 AM on 09/24/2010
Exactly how I feel and what was her IQ on tests growing up! That would matter more then the tests after the trial -
If she know how to count and bank on $350,000 and hire people to kill she deserves to be punished. Since she didn't kill them herself I am unclear how I feel.
Doesn't really matter today now does it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RIGHTmama
07:50 AM on 09/24/2010
This "remarkable" woman has been judged by her peers and has been sentenced by a judge. She has already LOST one appeal! There is a reason for that.
Let's see ... she was smart enough to understand that if her husband were dead that she could collect $350,000, that if she qualified as mentally disabled she would qualify for some sort leniency on her sentence SHE TOOK THESE TESTS AFTER THE TRIAL, NOT BEFORE. It doesn't take a genius to know that if you don't pass that test that an "intelligence quotient below 70 qualifies as mentally retarded according to the Supreme Court".
It is always amazing to me how the liberal mind works, this woman deserves to live, but a completely innocent fetus being ripped from its mothers womb at 24 weeks gestation is someone's right, is lawful, and is justifiable???
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
UpstateNY
09:34 AM on 09/24/2010
You've posted this several times.    You presume to know when life begins - quite a presumption.  I leave that to God.  I am pro-choice recognizing that it's a difficult choice.   But I don't presume I have the 'right' or authority to get between a woman and this choice.  You don't have that 'right' either. 
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anjushri
Veganism = Ahimsa
06:26 AM on 09/24/2010
Cold blooded murder. That's what the death penalty is. It makes all of us morally poorer.
07:18 AM on 09/24/2010
Cold blooded murder...that's what she participated in...and she got what she deserved.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slightly to the left of John Lennon
08:37 AM on 09/24/2010
I have to agree. "Thou shalt not k'ill" does not, as far as I know, have exception clauses. So I have to ask, how to followers or Judaism and Christianity rationalize the death penalty?
photo
alongst
too often denied to speak
05:08 AM on 09/25/2010
Thou shalt not let someone kill more ?