Black Inmate Spared Execution Suffers Legal Setback as Judge Rejects Retrial Bid Over Lawyer's KKK Ties

A Black Alabama prisoner who escaped execution after spending more than three decades on death row has suffered another legal setback after a judge rejected his bid for a new trial, despite revelations that his original defence lawyer previously represented the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Robin 'Rocky' Myers remains imprisoned for a murder he insists he never committed.

Morgan County Circuit Court Judge Charles Elliott dismissed Myers' petition on 28 August, declining to examine allegations concerning attorney John Edmond Mays' historical connections to the white supremacist organisation. The ruling came despite Alabama Governor Kay Ivey commuting Myers' death sentence in 2025 because she harboured doubts about his guilt. His lawyers have since challenged the decision.

Defence Lawyer's KKK Connections Exposed

Mays represented figures associated with the United Klans of America, a white supremacist organisation, in legal proceedings. His past work included litigation connected to the 1981 murder of Michael Donald, a Black teenager killed by Klansmen in Alabama. A civil lawsuit arising from Donald's death resulted in a $7 million (about £5.3 million) damages award against the organisation.

'I took Rocky's case because I hate the death penalty and I felt I could provide him with effective representation,' Mays told fellow lawyer Richard Jaffe, who shared the statement with CNN.

Records cited by Myers' legal team indicate that Mays spoke at nine KKK rallies between 1977 and 1981. A newspaper account of a 1977 gathering in Suffolk, Virginia, reportedly quoted him using a racial slur.

The Suffolk News-Herald reported Mays being quoted, 'You hear a lot about civil rights of the (N-word) and the civil rights of murderers and of every kind of pervert known to humanity. But what about the civil rights of the decent, law-abiding White man, or the law-abiding Black man, for the matter?'

Judge Rejects Petition Without an Evidentiary Hearing

Myers' attorneys argued that Mays' history raised serious concerns about whether their client received adequate legal representation. Judge Charles Elliott rejected Myers' petition on procedural grounds without holding an evidentiary hearing on the allegations involving his former lawyer.

In his written order, Elliott cited restrictions on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel raised in successive petitions. The ruling did not resolve whether John Edmond Mays' documented connections to the Ku Klux Klan compromised Myers' defence.

'In no event can relief be granted on a claim of ineffective assistance of trial or appellate counsel raised in a successive petition,' the judge wrote. 'The only exception to this bright line rule is when a petition is filed to be able to obtain an out-of-time appeal,' he added.

The judge did not determine whether Mays' KKK connections had compromised Myers' defence. Prosecutors maintained that the petition improperly revived previously available arguments and failed to establish an actual conflict of interest. Myers' lawyer, J. Mitchell McGuire, criticised the refusal to examine allegations that had never received a substantive judicial hearing.

Murder Conviction Built on Disputed Evidence

Myers was convicted in 1994 of murdering his neighbour, Ludie Mae Tucker, who was stabbed at her home in Decatur, Alabama, in October 1991. No murder weapon was recovered, and reporting on the case states that investigators found no physical evidence connecting Myers to the crime. The prosecution's evidence and the reliability of witness accounts have since been questioned.

Myers' lawyers have also challenged the reliability of prosecution witnesses. Their arguments include concerns about witness statements, although the details of any recantation should be verified against the relevant court records.

Myers continues to maintain his innocence despite his sentence being commuted to life imprisonment without parole. His attorneys filed an appeal with the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals on 8 October, seeking another opportunity to challenge his conviction. No timetable has been announced for a ruling.