The Nov. 25 editorial "Stop This Execution" argued for clemency in the case of Robin M. Lovitt, whose sentence was commuted to life in prison by Gov. Mark R. Warner last night. I agree it is unfortunate that physical evidence in the case could not be subject to more modern DNA testing. It is equally unfortunate, however, that The Post presented this case as a referendum on the integrity of Virginia's judicial system.
The editorial took great liberty in diminishing the integrity and deliberations of the jury by stating that the evidence was "not overwhelming" and resulted in a clouded conviction. Also, to say that stabbing a former co-worker in the chest and upper body six times with a pair of scissors for a minimal amount of cash does not meet the "horrific" threshold necessary for a capital murder charge is disappointing.
In my capacity as foreman of the jury, I vividly recall the details of Mr. Lovitt's trial and continue to support our unanimous guilty verdict.
While no single item of evidence was conclusive, the accumulation of the evidence over several weeks was overwhelming and left no reasonable doubt as to Mr. Lovitt's guilt. The jury deliberations were thorough, and we discussed and weighed the inconclusive nature of the physical DNA evidence. But the absence of reasonable doubt as it related to the body of evidence contributed to our swift verdict.
The Post's characterization of this conviction as clouded with doubt impugns the integrity and responsibility of the jury. Further, for the paper and the governor to question the clarity of the jury's decision using only one aspect of the case was irresponsible. I don't think Mr. Warner should have substituted his judgment for ours.