An Alabama man scheduled for execution on Thursday maintains his innocence in the murder of an elderly couple.

Jamie Ray Mills refutes any involvement in the tragic demise of Floyd and Vera Hill, a devoted married couple of 55 years, who were fatally assaulted during a robbery in 2004.

An Alabama man found guilty in the brutal killing of an elderly couple in a small town is scheduled for execution this Thursday, following nearly twenty years spent on death row.

Despite efforts from the defense, the 11th Circuit Court of Criminal Appeals rejected two motions seeking to postpone Jamie Ray Mills' execution. Mills, who maintains his innocence in the 2004 fatal assault of Floyd and Vera Hill, still has the option to pursue a stay from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Throughout multiple appeals, Mills has contended that his conviction rested on the false testimony of his wife, JoAnn Mills, who claims to have witnessed the assault. In recent court filings, the 50-year-old asserts that prosecutors withheld information about an agreement they struck with JoAnn Mills, thereby violating his constitutional rights and compromising the trial's integrity and resulting verdict.

Alabama Department of Corrections Commissioner John Hamm contends differently, asserting in legal filings that JoAnn Mills provided "detailed testimony" regarding her husband's actions towards the victims and their subsequent efforts to conceal their involvement.

Moreover, Hamm argues that the evidence against Jamie Mills was sufficiently incriminating that prosecutors could have secured a conviction even in the absence of JoAnn Mills' testimony.

What events preceded the murders of Floyd and Vera Hill?

In the weeks preceding June 24, 2004, Jamie Mills found himself in dire straits. On that fateful day, Floyd Hill, aged 87, and his wife of 55 years, Vera Hill, aged 72, were tragically murdered in their home located in the quaint town of Guin, approximately 70 miles northwest of Birmingham.

According to court records, Mills found himself unemployed, incarcerated due to overdue child support payments, and grappling with family hardships as his parents were in declining health. Additionally, he had succumbed to a recurrence of substance abuse.

During the trial, it was posited that Jamie and JoAnn Mills sought additional funds for drugs, leading them to target the Hills for robbery, as the Hills were reputed to keep substantial cash reserves at their residence.

Jamie Mills' exposure to drugs began during his teenage years when his parents, entrenched in their own addiction to methamphetamine, introduced him to substance use. This unfortunate upbringing led him down a path of addiction, with Mills himself becoming dependent on methamphetamine, using it nearly every day. Despite managing to achieve sobriety in 2003, he relapsed in 2004 due to what he described as "multiple stressors."

When authorities apprehended Mills, he possessed a mere $14, relying solely on the savings he had amassed from his employment as a mechanic.

A plea for permission to borrow a couple's phone escalates into a violent altercation.

Jamie and JoAnn Mills were reported to have spent the night before the tragic events under the influence of methamphetamine, as stated in a sentencing order from 2007. Departing from their residence at 5 p.m. the following day, they made a brief detour to purchase cigarettes before proceeding to the Hills' residence, as detailed in the order.

The order relayed Jamie's plan to JoAnn, instructing her to follow his lead as he discussed financial matters with a man. Upon arriving at the Hills' residence, the Mills requested to use their phone, which was granted. As conversation flowed between the four, Vera Hill mentioned items for sale in their shed, prompting JoAnn to inspect them. While returning to the front porch, a loud noise emanated from the shed where Jamie and Floyd Hill were. JoAnn witnessed her husband with an object raised over his shoulder, prompting the women to rush to the shed, discovering Floyd Hill on the ground.

Botched robbery: Elderly couple subjected to repeated strikes

According to the sentencing order, Jamie Mills struck Vera Hill in the back of the head with a ball-peen hammer immediately upon her arrival, and then struck her again when she attempted to rise. JoAnn Mills recounted during testimony that she was in a corner with her eyes shut, hearing the repeated sounds of the hammer hitting the couple.

Mills passed various tools to his wife—a hammer, a tire tool, and a machete—before they securely locked the shed and retreated into the Hills' residence. Inside, they seized a locked tackle box, Vera Hill’s purse, a phone, and a police scanner, as detailed in the document.

From the tackle box, the Mills retrieved $140 and medication, then returned to their own abode. They contacted Benjie Howe, referred to as a friend in court records, who visited them to purchase some of the acquired pain medication.

Subsequently, the Mills stored the remaining belongings of the Hills in a bag, which they placed in their shed before departing for the evening. They then proceeded to Jamie Mills’ father’s residence to spend the night and engage in a game of dominos, per court documents.

Upon their return the following morning, they discovered that dogs had torn open the bag containing the items. They transferred the contents, including a bloodstained T-shirt and pants, into a duffel bag, which they stowed in Jamie Mills’ vehicle, according to court records.

As they were departing their residence, officers intercepted both Jamie and JoAnn Mills. Inside their vehicle were items stolen from the Hills, along with the suspected murder weapons.

What transpired during the trial?

During the trial, John Wiley, Mills' defense attorney, presented compelling arguments to the jury, contending that Mills shouldn't face the death penalty for several reasons. Firstly, Wiley highlighted Mills' drug use, asserting that it impaired his ability to comprehend his actions. Additionally, he emphasized the intense stress Mills was under, as numerous challenges seemed to converge against him. Lastly, Wiley underscored the importance of Mills' role as a father to two teenage sons, suggesting that sparing him from capital punishment could offer an opportunity for his children to learn from his experiences and avoid making similar mistakes.

Moreover, Wiley urged the jurors to consider the moral implications of recommending the death penalty.

"Advocating for a death sentence for Jamie Mills equates to you being responsible for ending another life. It's not justifiable, it's immoral, it's barbaric, and it's imperative that you refrain from it. Your actions will have consequences, and you will be held accountable," he emphasized.

On the other hand, Jack Bostick, the district attorney advocating for the death penalty in Mills' case, depicted the crime as far exceeding a mere shooting death.

"This was an intimate, brutal assault − using a ballpeen hammer, a rusty machete, a rusty lug wrench − to repeatedly inflict violence upon two individuals. It wasn't a spur-of-the-moment act; it was calculated, merciless, and defies comprehension. It's almost inconceivable that one human could inflict such cruelty upon another," he lamented.

He continued, "The Hills were defenseless."

DNA of an unknown individual discovered on recovered items; death penalty sentence upheld.

Jamie Mills has spent the past 15 years endeavoring to reverse his impending execution, contending attorney lapses, procedural missteps, and insufficient evidence. Primarily, he asserts that the state's investigation into Benjie Howe has been inadequate.

Howe, known to occasionally use the Mills' vehicle, purportedly had equal access to it on the day of the crime, having been at the residence both before and after the incident, argued Jamie Mills' legal team.

Despite Howe's denial of involvement in the murders and providing two alibis confirming his whereabouts before and after his visit to the Mills', there is no evidence linking him to the scene, including DNA evidence. Similarly, there was no DNA evidence linking Mills to the crime.

However, DNA from an unidentified source, neither Howe nor Mills, was discovered on items retrieved from the Mills' vehicle. Nonetheless, the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) failed to yield a match.

Court documents indicate that the Hills' DNA was found on several items recovered from the Mills' car.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, in court filings, acknowledged that while the DNA testing did not definitively identify Mills or Howe as the perpetrator, the absence of a match on Howe was deemed unhelpful to Mills' defense.

Although there's no DNA evidence directly linking Jamie Mills to the crime, the state argues that the plethora of other evidence presented throughout the case is "overwhelming." 

Acknowledgements: Amanda Lee Myers and Marty Roney