Terence Lenamon argued against the imposition of the death penalty in the William Wells case last month, and the result was a jury finding that Wells should not receive death but instead life without parole.

The jurors’ determination was based upon consideration of the aggravating factors argued by the State as they balanced against the mitigating circumstances urged by Terry.  Mercy won:


So, what did Terry argue to these twelve jurors that resulted in four of them deciding against capital punishment?  

Read his Closing Argument here, stored for future reference in the Terence Lenamon Online Library:

Penalty Phase Closing Argument in William Wells adv Florida 

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/363315792/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-3i7GGS23xQeW4IL63Zlo&show_recommendations=true(function() { var scribd = document.createElement(“script”); scribd.type = “text/javascript”; scribd.async = true; scribd.src = “https://www.scribd.com/javascripts/embed_code/inject.js”; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(scribd, s); })();