Florida child sex killer is appealing his death sentence over prosecutor's ...

A convicted child rapist and murderer is appealing his death sentence in Florida by arguing that the prosecutor violated the so-called 'Golden Rule' by asking the jury to imagine his victim's suffering.

Granville Ritchie, 41, was sentenced to death in September 2020 for the 2014 killing of nine-year-old Felecia Williams, who was raped, strangled to death, stuffed into a suitcase and thrown off an overpass.

In arguing for the dearth penalty, Tampa prosecutor Scott Harmon said to the jury, in part: 'can you imagine the dread of knowing that your life is ending and you are feeling pain all over your body? That pain would’ve been greater for a little girl.'

Convicted child rapist and murderer Granville Ritchie, 41 (left), is appealing his death sentence, claiming prosecutorial mistakes. Ritchie was sentenced to die last year for the 2014 killing of nine-year-old Felecia Williams

In arguing for the dearth penalty, Tampa prosecutor Scott Harmon (pictured) said to the jury, in part: 'can you imagine the dread of knowing that your life is ending and you are feeling pain all over your body?'

According to Ritchie's appellate attorney Rachel Roebuck, Harmon's impassioned speech violated what is known in the legal profession as the Golden Rule, which is an argument that persuades jurors to put themselves in the place of the victim when considering a verdict, reported Fox 13.

WHAT IS THE GOLDEN RULE LAW?

The Golden Rule argument refers to an argument put forth by the prosecution in a jury trial, where jurors are persuaded to consider themselves in the place of the victim in reaching a verdict that they would prefer the defendant to get.

The argument is considered improper and could be grounds for an appeal because the jurors have to consider a case in an objective manner and rely on evidence alone, instead of their feelings and biases.

That argument is considered legally improper because jurors are expected to consider a verdict objectively based on evidence alone, instead of their personal feelings.

During a hearing in Florida Supreme Court on Thursday, Justice Jamie Grosshans closely scrutinized Harmon's remarks and signaled she was leaning towards the position of the defense.

'I’m trying to figure out how that is not a Golden Rule violation,' Grosshans said, referring to the prosecutor's speech.

Rick Buckwalter, the appellate attorney for Florida, conceded that it was 'a close call,' but argued that Harmon did not cross the line.

Buckwalter claimed that the prosecutor was merely