Carolyn Dimmick Final PDF.indd - Washington Secretary of State

Dimmick: Yes it is. First he had raped her. The neighbor had seen him, and they reported
him. He goes to the bucket for rape. He gets out. They didn’t tell her he’s out, and he
comes storming up the driveway of her house. When he raped her the first time, she was
washing a window. I don’t remember how he got in the next time. But then her neighbor
came over and the daughter came home from school and he slit their throats so they
couldn’t cry out. The only reason we got him is that he had taken a glass of water and left
his fingerprint right on the glass. He was one – ugh!
Hughes: Does the Campbell case still stand out in your mind?
Dimmick: Yes. Getting even with her because she dared to testify against him. The
Campbell case was so horrific.
Hughes: So when it comes to the death penalty, you don’t accept the notion that just
locking up a person like that is good enough? You wrote the majority opinion in the case,
joined by Justices Rosellini, Dore, Brachtenbach and Justice Pro Tem Cunningham.
Dimmick: Dolliver didn’t see it?
Hughes: It says Dolliver, Utter and
Pearson wrote partial dissents.
Dimmick: Hmmm.
Hughes: Here’s the news story from
1984: “The high court’s 5-4 ruling
upholding the death penalty included
a majority opinion yesterday by Justice
Carolyn Dimmick, a concurring opinion
and three partial dissents. Dimmick was
joined on the majority opinion by Justices
King County District Court Judge Carolyn Dimmick chats with
Supreme Court Justice Robert Brachtenbach at the montly Labor-
Management Luncheon of the Inland Boatmen’s Union in 1975.
Hugh Rosellini, Fred Dore, Robert Brachtenbach, plus Justice Pro Tem D.J. Cunningham.
Rosellini wrote a concurring opinion, and Justices James Dolliver, Robert Utter and Vernon
Pearson wrote partial dissents. The majority held that the state’s statutory scheme for
imposing the death penalty meets constitutional requirements and was properly applied in
Campbell’s case.”
81