To make sure you never miss out on your favourite NEW stories, we're happy to send you some reminders
Click 'OK' then 'Allow' to enable notifications
Death row inmate Richard Glossip, who's had three 'final meals', has had his execution date set.
Glossip was sentenced to death in 2004 for allegedly hiring a hitman to murder his then-boss, Barry Van Treese, in 1997.
Now, the death row inmate has had his death date set, but his lawyers insist that there's newly uncovered evidence that will prove his innocence.
For those of you unfamiliar with the true crime case that's sure to become a Netflix documentary, let us get you up to speed.
In 1997, Glossip, then a motel manager, was convicted of planning the murder of his boss.
Glossip was said to have hired a hitman, Justin Sneed - a 19-year-old who also worked at the motel - to do the job.
In 2004, Glossip was found guilty and sentenced to death, but has strongly maintained his innocence ever since, launching multiple appeals against his conviction while awaiting lethal injection.
While appealing against his conviction, Glossips death has been scheduled three times and he's been given three 'final meals' - one of those meals was fish and chips, a Wendy's Baconator burger, and a strawberry milkshake.
However, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals have set a new date for Glossips execution, which is set to take place on 22 September of this year, CNN reports.
His lawyers filed for a new appeal case on the same day the new date was announced, claiming that they had new evidence that would further prove Glossips innocence.
There's also a campaign of people online who believe the death row inmate isn't guilty.
One such group is Save Richard Glossip, which argues that the man in question is completely innocent.
The group argues: "Richard Glossip is on Oklahoma’s death row because the actual, admitted killer, Justin Sneed, invented a story to satisfy detectives and save himself. Sneed initially claimed he didn’t kill his boss, motel owner Barry Van Treese.
But detectives said they knew he did and didn’t act alone, and if he didn’t name his accomplice, he’d be left “holding the bag” for murder."
They then cite findings from the Reed Smith investigation into the case, which form the basis for Glossips new appeal.
"Reed Smith has offered new evidence to contradict, one by one, the findings presented to the jury, evidence that jurors said they “wish they’d seen” and that almost certainly would have resulted in a not-guilty vote," the group stated.
