OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Alabama Executes Killer of Famous Elvis Impersonator

5 sources · updated 2026-09-19
Left 0% Center 50% Right 50%
0 left · 1 center · 1 right

What happened

Alabama executed Jeffery Lee, 49, by lethal injection on Thursday at the William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, pronouncing him dead at 6:22 p.m. after the U.S. Supreme Court denied his request to halt the procedure; his last words were that all was well and that he loved his family and "my brothers on life row." Lee was convicted in 2000 of fatally shooting pawnshop owner Jimmy Ellis, a nationally known Elvis Presley impersonator who performed as Orion, and employee Elaine Thompson during a December 12, 1998 robbery at Jimmy's Pawn Shop in Orrville; another employee survived by pretending to be dead. A jury recommended life without parole by a 7-5 vote, but the trial judge imposed a death sentence under a judicial-override practice Alabama abolished in 2017 without making the change retroactive. In 2018, after Lee selected nitrogen hypoxia, Alabama agreed in a legal settlement that it would carry out any execution of him by that method rather than lethal injection; U.S. District Judge Emily Marks later barred Alabama's nitrogen protocol in his case as likely violating the Eighth Amendment, a ruling the 11th Circuit and, in June, the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision left in place. The state then scheduled lethal injection, arguing that Lee's successful challenge to nitrogen changed essential facts and allowed it to return to that method.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 5 articles

3 of 5 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 3 of 5
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: U.S. Supreme Court, Jeffery Lee's lawyers, Alabama Department of Corrections, The Associated Press, Gov. Kay Ivey and Lee’s attorneys
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 5
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: U.S. Supreme Court action, court settlement
Credits another outlet 0 of 5
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 5
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 17, 11:00 UTC by NBC News, naming its source. First document in the first report, from NBC News (U.S. Supreme Court action).
Not counted 0
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning coverage omits that an appeals court found nitrogen hypoxia most likely unconstitutional, so the halt reads as one judge delaying a sentence. NY Post calls that halt "a judge's ruling." It notes the Supreme Court declined to lift that order. Left-leaning coverage reports that the 11th Circuit made the Eighth Amendment finding. Without that appellate layer, the switch to lethal injection reads as beating a delay, not answering a holding that survived appeal. Left-leaning coverage opens on the blocked gas and the revived injection. Right-leaning coverage opens on last words and the pawnshop murders, and never describes the prior nitrogen deaths that produced the block. Has Alabama tried to rewrite the nitrogen protocol the courts rejected, or only changed methods for Lee?
Bottom line

NBC News told readers the 11th Circuit had found nitrogen likely cruel. The New York Post's account of Thursday's lethal injection never names that court.

The receipts — 5 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • The 11th Circuit found that nitrogen executions most likely violate the Eighth Amendment legal rulingin NBC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • The jury voted 7-5 to recommend life without parole numberin New York Post, CBS News · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • As the injection began, Lee clenched his fists and then closed his eyes individual casein New York Post, CBS News · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Gov. Kay Ivey said the case underscores exactly why the 2017 override ban did not apply to existing death sentences official statementin New York Post · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Lee's lawyers said he was not trying to permanently halt his execution contextin NBC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning coverage presented the execution as Alabama sidestepping both a court finding that its nitrogen protocol likely inflicts cruel and unusual punishment and the 2018 settlement in which it had sworn off lethal injection for Lee. NBC News dwelt on witness descriptions of prior nitrogen executions — Kenneth Smith's death lasting 15 minutes and Anthony Boyd gasping more than 225 times — and quoted Rev. Jeff Hood saying nitrogen "makes him drown in a room full of air" rather than putting a man to sleep. Lee's lawyers said he was not seeking a permanent halt but a method that did not "superadd[] terror and pain," and after the injection they stated Alabama "chose to execute Jeffery Lee by lethal injection, an equally problematic method it had told a federal court in 2018 it would not use." They called the sentence a "moral failure" because it "rested solely on judicial override," a practice "the State itself concluded was wrong enough to abandon." Amherst professor Austin Sarat argued that when the state offered a method choice, "the whole purpose is to bind us to perform against all future possibilities."
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage treated the execution as overdue justice for a double murder, quoting Gov. Kay Ivey that after Lee "attempted to avoid his deserved death sentence" the promise of justice was "fulfilled for his victims" and Attorney General Steve Marshall that "justice was finally served." The New York Post foregrounded the robbery's violence — Lee returning with a sawed-off shotgun after browsing wedding rings — and Ivey's claim that the case "underscores exactly why" the 2017 override repeal did not apply to existing death sentences. It cast Lee's method litigation as delay, noting the Supreme Court denied a stay without comment and that the state told the Court "It is Lee who has changed positions" by challenging the nitrogen method he had elected. Coverage closed on those last words and the start of the injection, presenting the outcome as a lawful sentence at last carried out.
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is that Alabama used lethal injection after promising in 2018 not to, and after courts blocked nitrogen, while executing a man whose death sentence came only from a judicial override the state later repealed; the lawyers' lines that Alabama "revives the very lethal injection method it promised to abandon" and that doing so under a discarded practice is "a moral failure, not just a legal formality" are the sharpest statement of that claim, backed by the settlement language and the jury's 7-5 life recommendation. The right's strongest argument is that Lee remained under a lawful death sentence for a double murder, a federal judge held the nitrogen injunction did not forbid lethal injection, and the Supreme Court refused to intervene, so the sentence was carried out after nearly three decades — as Ivey put it, a promise "fulfilled for his victims." The central unresolved tension is whether the 2018 method agreement and the later, non-retroactive override repeal should have barred this execution, or whether an inmate who invalidated the method he chose cannot then block the state's remaining authorized method.

5 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.