"🚨 TRUE CRIME SHOCKER! — THE HAUNTING FINAL WORDS OF THE FIRST INMATE EXECUTED SINCE CHRISTA PIKE!"
Jamaal Howard was put to death in Texas on October 7 for the 2000 killing of gas station worker Vicky Swartout. Before he was executed, Howard offered an apology to Swartout’s loved ones and spoke of finding peace in the Lord.
Howard was convicted of Swartout when he was 20 years old.
According to court records, Howard shot Swartout during a robbery at a Chevron station in Silsbee, Texas. He maintained his innocence throughout parts of the legal proceedings, while his attorneys continued to challenge whether he was competent to be executed.
In an unsuccessful effort to stop his execution, Howard’s attorneys argued that he had an intellectual disability and a history of mental illness.
Those efforts ultimately failed.
Jamaal Howard execution
Howard was pronounced dead at Texas’ Huntsville Unit at 8:03 p.m. local time after receiving a single dose of the lethal injection drug pentobarbital.
In his final statement, Howard said: “I wish that you accept my apology and I wish for your forgiveness.
“I’m sorry for what happened. I wish you can learn to forgive me one of these days.”
He then addressed the warden directly: “Warden, that’s it. I’m ready Warden.”
Howard also thanked his friends and family and told them he loved them, saying he was “in a good state of mind to find peace and the Lord, so I thank y’all,” according to
He ended his statement with a final message: “Hey, enjoy life, and peace to y’all.”
Seventh person put to death by Texas this year
In the moments leading up to his execution, Howard remained engaged with the staff accompanying him to the Huntsville Unit, according to the Department of Criminal Justice.
A department spokesperson said Howard spent the 45-minute ride from to the Huntsville Unit chatting with officers.
Spokesperson Amanda Hernandez said: “He made small talk with the officers through the whole trip.”
After arriving at the prison, Howard was taken to a holding cell inside the death chamber. Hernandez said he continued to engage with staff and appeared interested in what was happening around him.
“He was asking questions and was very engaged in the process,” Hernandez said.
Howard was then executed, becoming the seventh person put to death by Texas this year.
Two more executions are scheduled to take place in the state later this year.
"🚨 BRANSON'S SCATHING ATTACK! — HE BLASTS TRUMP OVER PUTIN TIES AND URGES EUROPE TO STAND FIRM!"
British billionaire Sir Richard Branson has launched a fierce public attack on Donald Trump, accusing the U.S. administration of appeasing dictators and putting personal preferences ahead of American and allied interests.
The Virgin Group founder made his criticism in a LinkedIn post published this week, questioning why Trump appeared so willing to accommodate Russian President Vladimir Putin while Ukraine continues to face Russia’s invasion.
Branson described the administration as an “appeaser to autocrats and dictators,” arguing that its approach could weaken confidence among America’s traditional allies and undermine the interests of democratic nations.
He also raised a pointed question about the president’s relationship with Putin, asking why Trump seemed to flatter the Russian leader despite the continuing war and widespread international concern over Moscow’s actions.
The remarks come amid renewed controversy over a reported agreement involving Russian diesel supplies and a temporary easing of U.S. sanctions on Russian energy exports.
Trump has defended the arrangement as beneficial to fuel markets, while critics argue that allowing Russian energy revenues to flow could indirectly help Moscow sustain its war effort.
Branson called the deal deeply hypocritical, pointing to the contrast between Washington’s previous willingness to penalize countries purchasing Russian energy and its own decision to ease restrictions.
His criticism extended beyond energy policy. He also condemned Trump’s public attacks on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, describing the administration’s treatment of Ukraine as a betrayal during a period of war and suffering.
The billionaire’s intervention follows mounting concern in Kyiv and across Europe about the durability of American support for Ukraine, particularly as diplomatic efforts have struggled to produce a lasting settlement.
Branson also expressed alarm about reports involving restrictions on Starshield services used by Ukraine, a technology issue that has raised questions about the country’s access to crucial battlefield communications.
Some of Branson’s claims about the consequences of satellite-service restrictions have not been independently confirmed, and the details of decisions involving military communications remain disputed.
He urged European leaders to respond more decisively, arguing that the continent cannot simply wait for Washington to determine the future of Ukraine’s security and its broader relationship with Russia.
His proposed response reportedly included considering the use of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine and supplying more advanced weapons, measures that would intensify the confrontation with Moscow.
The comments place Branson among a relatively small group of prominent business leaders willing to criticize Trump directly over foreign policy, despite the political and commercial sensitivities surrounding such interventions.
Branson has previously spoken out in support of Ukraine and criticized approaches that he believes would pressure Kyiv into accepting an unfavorable peace agreement with Russia.
The latest dispute also comes at a politically sensitive moment in the United States, with congressional midterm elections approaching and foreign policy increasingly intertwined with domestic debates over leadership and national priorities.
Supporters of Trump’s approach may argue that direct engagement with Moscow and energy-market flexibility can serve American interests, even when such policies provoke disagreement among allies.
Critics counter that concessions to Russia risk weakening deterrence and sending an unsettling message to countries relying on the United States for diplomatic, economic and military support.
The disagreement reflects a broader debate over whether negotiations and economic pragmatism can help end the war—or whether they could give Moscow additional leverage without securing meaningful concessions.
For Ukraine, the stakes remain immediate: continued military pressure, uncertainty over international support and the search for a settlement that preserves its sovereignty remain central concerns.
Branson’s intervention adds another prominent voice to the dispute, challenging the White House’s handling of Russia and demanding a stronger response from Europe as the conflict continues.
