From SkyNews

Death row Briton Linda Carty has said she will not stop fighting for the truth until she proves her innocence.

Carty, 51, could be given the lethal injection within weeks after the US Supreme Court refused to review a murder conviction campaigners said resulted from a "catastrophically flawed" trial. In a speech written for the opening of a life-size death row cell in central London, Carty said: "As a mother and a grandmother, I cannot give up hope of being free to hug my grandchildren again."

Carty was convicted in 2002 over the kidnap and murder of Joana Rodriguez, who was seized alongside her four-day-old son by three men on May 16 2001. The baby was found unharmed in a car, but Ms Rodriguez was killed, having suffocated with duct-tape over her mouth and a plastic bag placed around her head.

Carty's speech launches an exhibition which runs to September 5 and includes a replica of her death row cell in the courtyard of St Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, central London. A film of Carty speaking about her imminent execution will play on a loop, and visitors will be encouraged to write and post a letter in a special post-box asking the Texas authorities to spare her life.

"I am scared - sometimes I'm so scared I can't even speak," she said. "My words alone can't prove my innocence. That will require a fair trial and thorough examination of the evidence showing how and why I could never have committed the terrible crime of which I've been accused. But I can simply speak against murder itself. I believe that the truth will come out one day, that my innocence will be proven. But 'one day' takes on a whole new meaning when you are staring death in the face. I haven't got time on my side. As an innocent woman, I will not stop fighting for the truth."

Carty claims she was framed over the murder by the men who carried out the abduction due to her earlier work as an informant for the Drug Enforcement Agency.

Legal action charity Reprieve claim Carty was given an incompetent defence lawyer during the original trial who, amongst other alleged failings, neglected to inform the British Government so it could intervene on her behalf. The Foreign Office complained of "ineffective counsel" in court filings it made under the last government in support of Carty.

But in May, the US Supreme Court refused an application to review the murder conviction. It means that Carty could be executed unless the Governor of Texas intervenes.

I am so glad that we don't have the death penalty here. People are often found innocent of crimes many many years later, particularly if the original evidence has been flawed. It's scary to think how many innocent people may have died as the result of the death penalty in America.

@RedFraggle: to be fair, only certain states here actually HAVE the death penalty. About a third of our states don't allow the death penalty anymore.

If this woman is innocent, it's very unfortunate that she's being held.
I'm just shocked the Supreme Court denied a review of a trial like this...especially one where she's sentenced to death.

@RedFrag: It's scary to think that death is part of their LAW. That their courts condone murder, judicial or otherwise. It's a massive contradiction.

It's a ridiculously barbaric practice from a country that calls itself civilised, yo!
An eye for an eye and the world will go blind.

@Jessica I know it isn't every state but I'd say two thirds is still too many.

@Jess & Redfrag: a practice I hope the rest of the states will abolish!

A few years ago a British man was finally found innocent after being on death row for 21 years, I wonder how many Americans are found innocent before or after death. I also find it odd that so many people in America who support the death penalty are also christians.

@Transit. Yeah I've never understood that either. I don't know any British Christians who support a death penalty.

@ Redfraggle, Christianity was a very big influence in abolishing the death penalty here too. I doubt the UK government would be able to help her anyway, especially as the US government are all for imprisoning a mentally ill man for 30+ years, sadly it is true that in some countries you are guilty until proven innocent.

I dont think we should get rid of the death pentalty. Our prisons are full, and becoming more and more full every day, I read a number one time of the COST of keeping a person in prison for one year (dont remember the number sorry) was more than I MAKE in a year. And those of us with jobs are the ones who pay to keep them in prison. There are people who have done some horrible horrible things that have gotten the death penalty and completely deserved it.

If this woman is innocent, I would hope that she would get a second trial, because it is sad when innocent people get blamed for things that they havent done.

I think they need to change the laws as far as what will get someone the death penalty, I am not 100% familiar with them now so I'm trying not to open my mouth too far here, but I believe if you go on a killing spree, you deserve to die, I dont want to pay to keep you in your cushy little cell with TV and 3 square meals a day. I dont think that one murder should be punishable by death, I believe its the crazy criminals who do sick twisted things are the ones who deserve it.

@Brycen's Mommy: The problem with what you are saying (and I agree prison costs are a problem) is that very often we cannot be 100% sure that the person is guilty. You never know what evidence may surface later. Innocent people (people found guilty of "horrible horrible things") are imprisoned surprisingly often. So as long as the death penalty exists, innocent people WILL be executed. Does reducing prison overcrowding justify the killing of innocent people?

@Brycens's mommy, people on death row are in prison for a long time, some around thirty years, the facilities they are kept in are fare more expensive than 'normal' prisons. It costs more to execute a person compared to imprisoning that person for life, even if they are very young when they are sentenced.

@Brycen's Mommy: I'm in favor of reducing the prison population, but not through executions (which cost significantly more due to the appeals process and such). Decriminalization of nonsense laws makes more sense -- after all, laws meant to protect people from themselves should not exist -- let people make their own mistakes. A fair number of crimes could also carry no prison sentence -- I believe public floggings would serve as both suitable punishment and deterrent.

I don't agree with the death penalty. I believe that the risk is still there, where an innocent person is executed for a crime they didn't commit. That, in my opinion, should be enough to abolish the death penalty.

And besides, it costs MORE to execute a person than to keep them imprisoned for life.

In my opinion -- inmates on the death row should have the option to "offer" themselves for medical research - we'd learn so much more from that because lab animals can't tell us where it hurts if they're in pain from the trial medication, where humans can. In that way, the inmates would be giving back to the community and at the same time, avoid execution.

Just my opinion.

@aspiring boxer, i like the medical research idea.

I can see the point about medical research, although all drugs already have to go through human trials before they can be licenced for use. There's different stages to clinical trials, and animal testing is only the very earliest stage (and there are ways of detecting pain in animals, but I realise you were just using that as an example). Human trials then follow (using healthy volunteers initially, and then people suffering from the disease in question).

Still, giving inmates this option may increase the numbers of 'healthy' volunteers (although I suspect many prisoners wouldn't be suitable because they are more likely than the general population to have other diseases like heart or lung disease or HIV or drug abuse problems).

My state (Connecticut) has the death penalty. In the last 45 years one man has been executed. He brutally raped and murdered EIGHT young women.

He fully admitted to it and said if he could...he would do it all over again. I support the death penalty in this case because the man clearly committed the crime and had no remorse for doing so.

In general though I do not support it. Especially in Texas because if you commit one murder you are up for the death penalty. And they execute more than any other state.

I support the death penalty ESPECIALLY in repeat offender cases, even when the offense is a sex crime, or a crime against children that does not result in death. That is just my personal opinion on the matter. Obviously you run the risk of innocent people being put to death, and that is something our system needs to work on.

@Mindi: Obviously you run the risk of innocent people being put to death, and that is something our system needs to work on.

But the system can never be perfect. As long as the death penalty exists, innocent people will contine to be sentenced to death. Do you think that is an acceptable trade off for punishing the guilty?

@RedFrag Do you think that is an acceptable trade off for punishing the guilty?

Yes, I do, call me heartless, but I think that if there is enough evidence that a jury convicts that person then obviously there is a reason they were found guilty. Is it unfortunate that innocent people are put to death? Yes of course it is, of course no one wants to see an innocent man put to death, one innocent person's death or imprisonment is too many. However, I will not change my stance on the death penalty. Maybe I am just a vengeful person but I think if you can rape or murder someone then you deserve nothing but death.

@Mindi: But if you wanna be vengeful don't you think throwing them in prison to do hard labour for life for example is a much better punishment? If you want them to hurt like their victims did, death is quite fast and probably way less painful than having to spend the rest of your life doing hard labour! AND if one person was proved innocent it's not too late to make it up for them.

You can't just say it's 'unfortunate' that innocent people are being put to death in some cases and continue to perform the same thing that caused it to happen! Innocent lives are way too high of a price to pay because we want to murder all murderers or criminals.

@Giggle: on a non-related note - the thing with prisons here... most of the people who are imprisoned don't think twice about their crimes because most of their families are in the jail they'd be sent to. They still get to talk to their families on the outside, and as far as I'm aware they really don't do "hard labor". (But I may be wrong on that.) From what I've heard about jails...the inmates do laundry and work in the kitchens...and get some sort of reimbursement for it.

@Giggle: No prison that I know of puts their inmates to hard labor. They do laundry, work in kitchens, clean... nothing to constitute "hard" labor. I could be wrong, and this is just based off of the prisons I know my father has been in (several - which have all be in the South, so I'm not sure about other areas). They get TV, recreation time, libraries, computers, 3 decent meals a day.. and do their "chore/work". (Not that I'm pro-death penalty. I'm actually against it and wish they could figure out a better system. I agree with a previous poster about cutting down on the ridiculous laws.)

@Lauren: aren't those way too many benefits to be given to criminals! No wonder it costs a lot to have them imprisoned. Why would a criminal worry about going to prison if he's gonna be getting access to computers, TV, libraries and whatever? It's probably more than what s/he had when they had their freedom! They definitely need to figure out a better system.