Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Was Brown a more timely decision than Roe? Previous entry: HPV and vaccination: one blogger’s obsession

The death penalty and our corrupted justice system

Crime

Condolences to Troy Davis's family; I cannot imagine what it must be like to lose a family member because the state railroaded him into the death penalty to appease a bloodthirsty and unduly frightened public. I hope the outrage over this case is channeled into a more robust opposition to the death penalty.  If we want it to end, we have to make it a priority. 

Lindsay has an excellent response to my argument that death penalty activism should get away from the abstract question of whether or not the state has a "right" to kill someone---which I believe encourages people to think more of worst case scenarios like obviously guilty serial killers who have no claim to life after all they've done---and move more towards questions about how the death penalty cannot be enacted in a way that's clean, fair, and non-corrupting. I want to clarify what I mean by this, since Lindsay quotes some of my piece in the Guardian about Rick Perry and how the death penalty increases bloodthirstiness.  I want to be clear that I incorporate this larger critique into my "focus on the procedure/the system" argument.  I'm proud of that piece because I think I lay out a good case for why the death penalty actually makes it easier to railroad an innocent person.  Capital cases send the message that someone must pay for this, and whether or not the someone is guilty stops being as important.  Blood for blood.  Lindsay correctly identifies the pro-death penalty arguments as being purely revenge-oriented. What's important to remember is that, historically speaking, "blood for blood" doesn't necessarily mean you get the blood of the person who actually drew blood.  Throughout most of history, getting the blood of their child or their wife or their parent or their friend would do.  I have a strong feeling that much of the "blood for blood" thinking in capital cases allows people to accept substitute executions. For many people, that Davis was likely innocent isn't the point---one family lost a family member, so another must sacrifice.  This creates symmetry and people watching can walk away.  Except of course the two families who are still missing their members, but they get lost in the shuffle.

Revenge isn't justice.  The fact that a proxy murderer is so easy to kill demonstrates this.

My concern with the Troy Davis case is that the amount of attention he got will convince people that his situation is uncommon. What I want people to emphasize in the conversations they have about this going forward is that he's literally just one of many, and that his situation is actually quite common. The state of Illinois took it upon themselves to shove aside the typical approach to death penalty cases---which is to conceal evidence of innocence, railroad defendents appealing on the grounds of a mistrial, and just do everything they can to get someone to the death chambers whether they're guilty or not---and found that 6% of their defendents sitting on death row were not guilty. That's 20 people in one state alone. 

Some cases:

When the fire broke out, Hobley, 26, escaped the flames without shoes and wearing only underwear. He consistently maintained his innocence, alleging that the officers tortured him and — when that failed — fabricated a confession.......

The detectives claimed the confession was voluntary, but Jones claimed he signed it because he had been beaten by Hood and Markham. Jones testified that Hood struck him in the head three or four times with a black object about six inches long before Markham said, "Don't hit him like this because he will bruise" and proceeded to punch Jones repeatedly in the stomach.....In 1997, the DNA testing established conclusively that Jones was not the source of the semen recovered from the victim. Even then, prosecutors refused to abandon the case. They stalled Jones's release until, facing a retrial, they finally dropped all charges against him on May 17, 1999.

They were arrested three weeks after the crime when a witness, Phyllis Santini, went to the police with a story implicating them. Both men professed their innocence, but police found a watch taken from one of the victims in Cobb's room. Cobb claimed he bought the watch for $10 from Johnny Brown, Santini's boyfriend..... Before enrolling in law school, Falconer took a summer job in a factory, where Santini also worked. One day she confided that she and her boyfriend — Brown — had robbed a restaurant and shot someone.

It was Caraway's testimony that ultimately sent Smith to death row, but that testimony was dubious for several reasons..... irst, Caraway had been smoking crack cocaine. Second, she claimed Willis was alone when the killer stepped out of shadows and fired the fatal shot, but two other witnesses said they were standing beside Willis when he was murdered. Third, Caraway's boyfriend, Pervis (Pepper) Bell, was an alternative suspect in the murder. Finally, Caraway, according to her account, was across the street when the crime occurred and, while she positively identified Smith, the two persons who were standing beside Willis were within only two or three feet of the killer and could not identify Smith.

The reprieve was granted not out of concern that Porter might be innocent but solely because he had tested so low on an IQ test that the court was not sure he could comprehend what was about to happen to him, or why. The court's intent was merely to provide time to explore the question of the condemned man's intelligence, but it had an unanticipated consequence: It gave a Northwestern University Professor David Protess, private investigator Paul Ciolino, and a team of journalism students time to investigate the case and establish Porter's complete innocence...... On January 29, 1999, Alstory Simon's now-estranged wife, Inez Jackson, told Protess, Ciolino, and two of the students that she had been present when Simon shot Green and Hillard. She said she did not know Anthony Porter, but that he most certainly had nothing to do with the crime. Four days later, on February 3, Alstory Simon confessed on videotape to Ciolino, asserting that he had killed Hillard in self-defense after the two argued over drug money. Simon claimed the shooting of Marilyn Green had been accidental.

On Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 43-year-old Ronald Kitchen, who confessed under extreme physical duress to taking part in five murders 21 years ago, was exonerated and freed from prison.... Kitchen’s conviction rested primarily on his confession, but also involved a jailhouse snitch, Willie Williams, who has admitted that he lied when he testified that both Kitchen and Reeves had confessed the crime to him.

Reading these cases is a revealing peek into how quickly justice is thrown out the window in order to get someone---anyone, really---on the hook for these murders. Innocent people were beaten for hours, suffocated, and threatened into confessing, which they often recanted as soon as the torture stopped, if they weren't too despondent and broken to stop caring. Jailhouse snitches facing positive attention and probably some rewards just made stuff up to convict them. Actual murderers and their friends turned the innocents in, and the cops were so happy to have a name they didn't bother to investigate the people who might have a motivation to get someone else on the hook for the crime.  Needless to say, black people are ridiculously overrepresented in these cases.

That's just in Illinois. Other state governments that are invested in the death penalty haven't been so brave as to revisit these cases honestly. I strongly suspect they are as likely---probably more likely in some cases---to have as many innocent people just sitting on death row. While getting falsely convicted of any crime sucks, death row is far worse for a couple of reasons. One is that you're sitting around waiting to die, of course, and you have to spend oodles of your time just trying not to die by appealing your case. Second of all, death row is worse for most prisoners than regular prison. You're often given shittier accomodations and you don't get to interact with other people as much.  You're basically being quietly tortured the whole time. Damien Echols, who was falsely convicted and sentenced to death and has been recently released with the other two of the West Memphis Three, has had his health seriously degraded by the conditions of death row

Someone points to the river, noting the geographical irony of the party’s location. But Damien, with his wife of 13 years, Lorri Davis, glued to his side, can’t see that far. After years in an isolation cell less than 12 by 8 feet, he’s lost his distance vision......

Five hours a week, alone, in a covered, outdoor cell offered scant sunlight and no real chance to exercise. A thin pad on a concrete bed was hard on his bones.

And in a fucked up way, he's one of the lucky ones, since people championed him and he finally got out.  A lot of people don't have that advantage. And even then, the state was so invested in making sure someone paid for the tragic murder of these three little boys that they basically showed utter indifference to the lack of evidence linking the West Memphis Three to the crime. Even at the end, they extracted a guilty plea, because that's how much the system is geared towards conviction over justice. 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 08:06 AM • (35) Comments

Thanks for this post! I agree 100%. Thought Hammurabi had been disproven in almost any occasion, and an eye for an eye does not just make the world blind, it doubles the damage.

That said, I think the Troy Davis case quite forcefully demonstrates that by allowing state-sponsored executions, we have surrendered too many of our freedoms.

My thoughts on that are here:
http://theoncominghope.blogspot.com/2011/09/troy-davis-and-death-penalty.html

Comment #1: theoncominghope  on  09/22  at  09:26 AM

Ok, so my bff from high school was raped and murdered by a guy who confessed before anyone knew a crime had been committed. He committed suicide in prison before a trial, but it was set to be a capital case. I’ve always been weakly anti-death penalty - I don’t care about obvious serial killers dying so much as society facilitating more killing, plus is super fucking expensive. That my friend’s case never went to trial saved me having to work through the contradiction in my feelings, because what I experienced was not increased bloodlust exactly, but I wanted him convicted with the most severe punishment our system has to offer, to acknowledge that what happened to my friend what pretty much the worst thing that could happen to anyone. I wanted society to agree with me that our loss was tops and that he was first degree worst of the worst. I didn’t need him to be put to death, but if he had gotten less than the worst it would have been a slap in the face. If the death penalty had been off the table (and at the time NC had a moratorium on the death penalty, so it seemed possible that he could be sentenced and not actually killed) I would have been ok with life with no parole. So I can testify that just the existence of the death penalty eats away at the morality of those involved.

As an aside, I feel bad for the guy’s family, but it’s, um, very nice for me that he’s dead. We never had to go to trial and he never got to tell his side of the story and I don’t have to worry about him anymore. I know that this is an ugly thing, but experiencing something like having a friend killed is fucking awful and I’ll take what closure I can get. I can’t take the high road. Cannot do it. I’m not going to pretend I have even tried to feel sorry for him about it, but also I’m not responsible for his death in any way… but we all are responsible in death penalty cases. I would forever have had conflicting feelings if he had been put to death by the state.

Comment #2: ElleDee  on  09/22  at  09:39 AM

Some people certainly earn a death sentence, some even deserve to be put to death, but I have a hard time believing that everyone convicted did what they got convicted of. And I work in a prison. I’d say 90% are there for what they did. And of the other 10%, maybe four out of five did something else just as bad and belong there for at least some time. And it’s that last 2% or so that bug me the most, though I’ll be damned to point them out. I assume nothing. I have to treat them all like untrustworthy scumbags, and I’m rarely disappointed. I do so with a friendly smile and as much humanity as I can, but the place drags me down.

Aside from the sentences being too long, the lack of any real rehabilitation going on, the fact that the public demands punishment while they’re there but wants them to be rehabilitated when they hit the streets, and the knowledge that even when things are done correctly there are still serious errors, I get a bit depressed working where I do.

I’m glad I don’t have to work near the very high-custody inmates often, as the stab vests and eye protection makes for a sweaty and irritable me. The mental health inmates are equally depressing, as they yell out “Fuck you, punk!” when I go see what he’s got for me to do for them. And no, I don’t think I need to notarize that toilet paper with the affidavit regarding the CIA’s latest methods of tormenting you. Sad, weird, funny but not at all.

Prison fucks people up. It takes a strong mind to survive it without changing. If someone goes in not paranoid, they should get that way. It’s traumatic, disorienting, dehumanizing, soul-sucking, and depressing. And I get to go home every evening.

I sometimes think that life should be the maximum sentence. Then I think the death penalty should be a possibility for any inmate who has a life sentence. It could be voluntary, even. I know many old guys who ask that they not have CPR performed on them if they’re found unconscious and barely breathing. It would be against policy not to try to save them. (Officers and staff are required to be performing first aid when they can, even if the chest compressions are only causing blood to squirt out of the holes in the inmate’s chest or eye sockets or neck or whatever—trust me, just following orders—though I don’t think they did that for the decapitated guy I heard about.) Some of them want to die.

I hate to think of ways to make the death penalty less likely to be wrongly instituted. Mistakes happen. One criminal gets ten years, another gets life, and they were there for the same crime. Then there’s the solution for that: felony murder. But that leads to the getaway driver being convicted for the gunman’s crime, though the gunman cooperates and gets 25 while the driver gets a death sentence thinking his buddies weren’t talking. Unfairness is always going to happen.

I thought of a way that after ten years of serving a life sentence, the state could decide based on that inmate’s behavior that an inmate wasn’t worth the expense of keeping him or her alive. Then I realized how abusive that could be. I still like the idea of the death penalty being a separate trial after a conviction for any appropriate crime. There are double-jeopardy issues involved, but it could be dealt with by having sentences be open-ended in the punishment realm. But that can be abused, too.

There’s no way to have a fair system. Some still deserve to be killed. I’m happy I don’t make those decisions. I fear thinking like those who want to make those decisions. And I think a life sentence can be insanely cruel and horrible anyway.

As long as there is the possibility of government messing up, it will. I believe in government, but I wouldn’t want to trust it with my life in any trial. I don’t know why conservatives distrust of government doesn’t extend to the death penalty, but bloodthirst is the best explanation. The less-flattering explanations tend to be toward racism, ownership of women and children, and all the other things that a good lynching enforced throughout these United States for so many years. And today.

Comment #3: 3letterjon  on  09/22  at  09:58 AM

What really gets me about cases like the West Memphis Three is that we know that a brutal murderer has been walking the streets free this whole time and all society gives is a collective shrug.  And now even after they’ve been released, as far as the justice system is concerned, they did it.  It illustrates Amanda’s point that executing criminals is not at all about justice, nor is it about trying to stop other murders from happening.  It’s about our bloodthirsty desire for revenge.

Comment #4: Blitzgal  on  09/22  at  10:03 AM

And I just read that they kept Davis strapped to the gurney for the entire four hours that his execution time was delayed.  We are just some base fucking animals, aren’t we?

Comment #5: Blitzgal  on  09/22  at  10:11 AM

All this bloodlust reminds me of a passage from Voltaire’s “Philosophical Letters” in which he interviews a (fictional) Quaker: “We never take up arms, not that we are fearful of death; on the contrary, we bless the instant that unites us to the Being of beings. The reason is, that we are neither wolves, tigers, nor mastiffs, but men and Christians. Our God, who has commanded us to love our enemies, and to suffer without repining, can certainly not order us to cross the seas, and cut the throats of our fellow–creatures, as often as murderers, clothed in scarlet, and wearing caps two feet high, enlist peaceful citizens by a noise made with two sticks on an ass’ skin extended. And when, after the gaining of a battle, all London blazes with illuminations, when the air glows with fireworks, and a noise is heard of thanksgivings, of bells, of organs, and of cannon, we groan in silence for the cruel havoc which occasions these public rejoicings.””

Comment #6: JonE  on  09/22  at  10:23 AM

Elle, thank you for your comment, and condolences for your terrible loss.  I’m glad that you make a good case for why we need to separate the justice system from people’s very understandable desires for revenge. I agree that a man who does what your friend’s murderer did has no right to live, honestly. But that’s such a grave question it really falls outside of what we can, as a society, agree on. That’s why I think that debate needs to be removed from the conversation, and we need to talk about we can agree falls into our rights. In a way, having death as an option makes it worse for families and friends of victims, because if the state doesn’t pursue death in your case, it makes it seem like your loss is “less than”, when it is not.

Comment #7: Amanda Marcotte  on  09/22  at  10:26 AM

LGM focused on this quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, which I think is the nub of the problem:

“I have yet to see a death case among the dozens coming to the Supreme Court on eve-of-execution stay applications in which the defendant was well represented at trial. People who are well represented at trial do not get the death penalty.”

It’s just not fair that only poor murderers should be executed.

Comment #8: dopus dei  on  09/22  at  11:10 AM

3letterjon:

. . . the public demands punishment while they’re there but wants them to be rehabilitated when they hit the streets . . .

So true.

Comment #9: rain  on  09/22  at  11:15 AM

I really don’t give a shit about the legal technicalities.

I’m a Black man who’s less than a generation removed from Jim Crow (I was born in 1968 - my mother was born in 1936 in North Carolina).

The bottom line is, the government should not be in the business of murdering people

Period.

Full Stop.

I don’t care if he’s Ted Bundy, or Osama bin-Ladin, for that matter.

When the government murders people, it steps down into the same gutter the criminals are in.

What part of that is hard to understand?

Now, I get it, a LOT of my Caucasian fellow citizens can’t see beyond race. Basically, under the legal arguments when they see one of their racial brothers or sisters murdered by one of mine, they want color vengeance. That’s why, although 50% of murder victims are Black, 80% of the folks on death row are Black men who were convicted of murdering White people.

So I can see why they might overlook the fundamental injustice of the government being in the cold blooded murder business.

However, I urge my White fellow Americans to look beyond color (difficult as it is for you guys to do that - I have White relatives, and I’m lightskinned enough that sometimes you guys forget that I’m Black if I’m the only one in an otherwise all White room, so I know how you guys think) and look to simple human justice.

Do you want murders committed in your name?

If so, how are you any better, morally speaking, than Al Capone or Heinrich Himmler?

Comment #10: GregoryAButler  on  09/22  at  11:18 AM

Gregory:  +1

I’m about as white as they come (well, I’m not albino… wink ) but I agree with you 100%.

FYI, here’s the complete list of countries that had executions in 2010, in order of executions:

China
Iran
North Korea
Yemen
United States
Saudi Arabia
Libya
Syria
Bangladesh
Somalia
Sudan
Palestinian Authority
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Taiwan
Belarus
Iraq
Malaysia
Bahrain

We are known by the company we keep.

Comment #11: James  on  09/22  at  11:35 AM

I don’t like being part of a society that has countdowns to executions.

Full Stop

Comment #12: ewellone  on  09/22  at  12:10 PM

  Matthew 27: 24-25

When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

Comment #13: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  09/22  at  12:24 PM

I’m proud of that piece because I think I lay out a good case for why the death penalty actually makes it easier to railroad an innocent person.

Another reason, one you don’t mention in the blog today, is that the availability of the death penalty creates an inducement for innocent people to plea bargain for a lesser sentence. Who wants to take a chance on being executed?

 

Comment #14: catfood  on  09/22  at  12:29 PM

There’s a whole lot of win in the comments today.

Comment #15: idiosynchronic  on  09/22  at  12:31 PM

I think you’re right that a procedural argument is more convincing for us white people who desperately need to believe that we’re being “objective” and “unemotional” when deciding whether a non-white person should be allowed to exist or not.  But I can’t do it.  The defining feature of my feminism/morality is that the state is not capable of making life or death decisions on behalf of its citizens.  It cannot/should not tell a woman to create life, and it cannot/should not tell a man when he will die.

Blitzgirl, he was strapped the whole time?  Fuck. 

Death is so unpredictable and random that knowing the minute when we will die is almost a gift.  If I knew when that moment would be, I could be sure that I was in the arms of someone who loved me so that I didn’t have to face death alone.  Not only was Troy and other victims of democratically-decided murder forbidden from holding onto the hand of a loved one while they die, as guards with guns keep watch, but the state of Georgia apparently forbids family members of the state’s victim (who are largely black) from witnessing the execution, but allows the crime victim’s family (who are largely white) to do so.  We had bloodthirsty white people watching and rejoicing as the white state killed a black man for a crime he didn’t commit. 

God, is there a word for this skin-crawling sensation of self-hatred for knowing that I was complicit in killing Troy Davis?  We all are.  We live in a democracy.  This was done in our name.

Comment #16: stubbles  on  09/22  at  12:55 PM

Gregory, and all:

Have you read the New Jim Crow?

http://www.amazon.com/New-Jim-Crow-Incarceration-Colorblindness/dp/1595581030/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1316710534&sr=8-1

You really, really should.

Comment #17: hideandseek  on  09/22  at  12:55 PM

I’m one of those people who thinks Hammurabi was actually an attempt to stop cycling the violence up. And then you have things like The Orestia where the whole point was that the “blood calls for blood” thing has to be transcended. And that’s in Ancient Greece. We’ve been struggling with this for a long, long time. I’m pretty much firmly with Amanda on this one.

Comment #18: LC  on  09/22  at  01:04 PM

I’m blown away by the comments from ElleDee, 3letterjon, and Gregory A. Butler.  Thank you!

Obviously, I agree that the government cannot be trusted to decide who should die.  I once declined the opportunity to be a homicide prosecutor because I absolutely did not want to be involved on behalf of the state in any capital cases. As a former prosecutor in non-homicide cases, I am keenly aware of how very easy it is to make a mistake.  While I am relatively confident that those I have prosecuted were in fact guilty, I have certainly made incorrect assumptions in cases, misunderstood facts, or just been flat-out wrong about certain things.  I can easily see how such mistakes could add up to prosecuting the wrong person!

What I can’t understand is how it is that so many other law enforcement officials seem incapable of recognizing their own fallibility and that of the system.  In fact, I think that the many DAs and police who lack that important quality of humility are MORE likely to perpetrate terrible injustices.

Comment #19: Laurie  on  09/22  at  01:45 PM

This post and the previous post on Troy Davis bookended my morning, and I agree with idiosynchronic and Laurie that there’s been a lot of really great discussion in both.  I wish I had something more than these tentative thoughts:

ElleDee, I’m so sorry for what happened to your friend.  Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.  I can’t imagine that it was easy to write.
I think that your story complicates Lindsey B’s point about the pro-DP argument from closure in the piece Amanda linked. 
When I put myself in the position of a victim’s family or friend, it doesn’t seem right to me to say that the death of a murderer DOESN’T provide a kind of closure.  (I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I think you see that closure as imperfect, and that’s how I think I would feel, too.)
Lindsey’s point isn’t terrible, or even necessarily wrong, but I think that she discounts the experiences of victims’ families and loved ones when she says that

I’ve never seen any evidence that families or communities heal faster or more completely from crimes when the perpetrator is executed than when s/he gets life without parole. The idea that the death penalty provides better “closure” is an untested nostrum.

To me, it makes sense to acknowledge that something like this requires the survivors to reach some kind of closure*, and that in many cases the death of the murderer would do the job.  We can say that, and also say that ANY closure from such a terrible thing is going to be imperfect—the dead aren’t coming back—and figure out other ways to help the survivors of murder cope, as best they can, in their own ways.
*I hope I’ve expressed my skepticism about the idea of “closure” in a situation like this—I think that’s what Lindsey might be trying to express.  But even if closure is an impossibility in the absolute sense, isn’t it necessary to reach something approaching it in every case?  Sorry if I’m not saying this very well: I just think that we need to simultaneously acknowledge the impossibility of moving on, and do the best we can, under the circumstances.  Because life does go on.  (I hope that doesn’t sound flippant.  I don’t mean it that way.)

3letterjon, thanks for your testimony about working in a prison.  Again, a firsthand account that complicates the picture.  I wish I had something to say besides good luck and hang in there.

GregoryAButler, you convinced me!  Right on.  You’ve got me rethinking my (at the time) smile about the execution of OBL.  Have to admit I’m still not sorry to see him dead, but I think that another outcome would have been better.  At the time, it was hard to be anything but happy.  Don’t want to derail by bringing that up, sorry.
You also got me thinking about working against the DP in a larger context of progressive action.  Ending execution is, really, one step (most of us here would agree) on a path to bigger and better things, both in criminal justice and, y’know, the world.

On preview, this whole comment seems wishy-washy to the extreme. 
Somehow that seems connected to the procedural argument against execution that Amanda’s been making.  Uncertainty, complication—I can’t advocate an irreversible penalty in the face of these monsters.

Comment #20: Snoe  on  09/22  at  02:01 PM

Laurie wrote:

Obviously, I agree that the government cannot be trusted to decide who should die.

While the government has the option to pursue a death sentence in a capital crime, or go for life imprisonment, it’s not the government deciding this: only a jury can decide to impose capital punishment.  The judge has the option of reducing that to life imprisonment (this may not be true for every state), but cannot revise a life imprisonment sentence upward to death.

The government gets more involved in the appellate process, where appeals courts get to take the decisions based on disagreements over the application of the law, but they rarely have much to say over disagreements over the interpretation of the facts of the case; that is supposed to be wholly the province of juries.

Comment #21: Dana  on  09/22  at  02:23 PM

I missed one country…  Japan had a couple executions last year.  Doesn’t justify ours.

http://www.handsoffcain.info/archivio_news/201007.php?iddocumento=13311381&mover=0

Comment #22: James  on  09/22  at  04:21 PM

Thanks everyone. It’s been seven years now, so I’m ok talking about it, though sometimes I hesitate to bring it up because I don’t want to seem like I’m looking for pity or trying to pull a trump card in conversations about crime and punishment.

But to go off of what Snoe was saying about closure, I think in the end it’s impossible to generalize about what is best for those close to the victim in any sense. Compared to some people we had it easy - we were 1000% sure of the identity of the murderer and had him in custody from the beginning and I can’t imagine how much more difficult it would have been not knowing so much or not being sure or wondering if he was still out there. But even within our tight group of friends there was a very diverse range or reactions. Some people remained very firmly anti-death penalty and probably would have protested, while others would have hacked him to bit with a rusty machete themselves. I was surprised at how many people were upset that he got to control and choose his death and were mad he never got his day in court, while I firmly believe that was the best thing that could have happened. There’s no one way that makes the victims feel better, though I think that the death penalty can make things worse for us. It’s another variable in the trial process to angst over, another thing to have to wait year and years for and another thing to maybe feel guilty about.

I know that there are probably other people in my position that disagree and that’s fine. It’s a miserable club to be in and we’ve all certainly been through enough. But it’s impossible to write law that’s going to make things better for us, because the past can’t be undone, yes, but more because we all are different people and are comforted by different things.

Comment #23: ElleDee  on  09/22  at  05:12 PM

Dana, You are right, of course, as to the role of the jury and the judge in a capital case.  There is also the role of the prosecutors in deciding whether to pursue a capital charge.  In any case, our juries are a part of our government, no?  But, either way, the point still stands—I don’t trust any group of fallible human beings to make decisions regarding who should live and who should die.  Regardless of the checks and balances, collective decisionmaking, and appeals, I have seen first hand how easy it is for mistakes to occur in the criminal justice system.

Comment #24: Laurie  on  09/22  at  05:50 PM

CNN keeps calling Troy Davis ‘defiant’,  which seems like an after-the-fact attempt to justify the execution or make people feel less bad about it. He wasn’t defiant; his words sound resigned, sorrowful, regretful.  He just would not cop to a murder he didn’t commit. One of the two witnesses who did not recant——out of nine——is a man presumed to be the actual murderer. This also happened in the case of Ron Williamson,  who was not at the location where the murder he was convicted of happened—-and the murderer was. There was nothing but that false ID and a couple jailhouse snitches to connect he and his co-defendant to the crime, but lots of people put the real murderer at the scene several times and in several places. While he was on Death Row, as he slowly disintegrated without any mental health treatment, the guards would imitate a woman’s voice over the intercom, say they were the woman he allegedly killed, and ask him why he had killed her. He had had some problems when he went into jail; when he came out he was a paranoid schizophrenic and only lived a few more years.

  They’re not just letting the murderer go free. The murderer is actually getting innocent people convicted and jailed for their crimes. 

When prison officials and wardens are talking about how horrifying they find execution, how the possibility of an innocent man being executed haunts them,  I want to know how on earth executing people can be justified.

Hell, even Mark Fuhrman——a staunch death penalty supporter——-went to Oklahoma one year and came back a passionate opponent of it. That was the year that Joyce Gilchrist——the head of the state’s forensic labs——was proven to have falsified evidence, invented evidence, and conducted shoddy investigations—-including rampant contamination———in pursuit of a high conviction rate. I read that book a couple of years ago. The state was resisting all attempts to open new investigations into the cases of the people Gilchrist sent to jail.

Comment #25: ginmar  on  09/22  at  07:28 PM

I wonder if there will be a tipping point soon in some jurisdictions where it’s effectively impossible to empanel a valid jury in death-penalty cases. Some studies have reportedly already shown that people who don’t have objections to the death penalty are measurably more willing to convict period. At some point that means you either can’t empanel a jury because there will be too many challenges for cause, or any jury you empanel will end up with someone who makes a non-correctible gaffe during or after trial.

Oops, all that requires the accused have quality representation. My bad.

Comment #26: paul  on  09/22  at  08:43 PM

Throw in prison privatization to the corruption mess: two judges have already been convicted of accepting bribes to (unjustly) convict and throw kids into a private prison.

“Two senior Pennsylvania judges have been sentenced to seven years in prison for taking bribes from juvenile detention centers—in exchange for the bribes, the judges turned in guilty verdicts for the teens who appeared before them and sent them to juvie, thus enriching the operators of the kiddy gulag. For this, the judges received $2.6 million in kickbacks…

Ciavarella, known for his harsh and autocratic courtroom demeanor, filled the beds of the private lockups with children as young as 10.”
http://boingboing.net/2009/02/02/judges-jailed-for-ta.html

Privatized prisons are relatively new, so expect more of the same, and other problems are of course bobbing up:

“Prisoner-on-prisoner assaults are 54 percent higher in private prisons than in public prisons, and prisoner-on-staff assaults are 49 percent higher.”
http://my.firedoglake.com/mt6112a/2011/09/22/treatment-of-prisoners-by-guards-in-private-prisons/

I shudder to think of the effect of prison privatization on death penalty cases.

Comment #27: judybrowni  on  09/22  at  10:04 PM

judybrowni, it’s not just privatization of the prisons themselves.  It’s privatization of everything that goes on inside them, including health care.  I have sat on a few depositions now of people suing the privatized medical provider in the state prisons here, and the testimony is gruesome.  A plaintiff in a wheelchair is suing for multiple surgeries he had to have to remove the infected tissue and bone that resulted from a bed sore that went untreated in the prison.  He got the bed sore because his cushion on his wheelchair developed a hole and the air leaked out, leading to this compression sore.  Of course the prison couldn’t be shifted to get his new cushion, the sore resulted, and when they finally got around to treating it, it was so far gone it required multiple surgeries with a plastic surgeon to fix, which the prison only reluctantly and after he was in great pain offered.

Then there was the guy who went into prison because he couldn’t afford bail.  This guy wasn’t even CONVICTED yet.  He developed sores on his feet which were not treated to the point he got gangrene and had to have both legs amputated.  He was later released from prison with the prosecutor dropped the charges against him.

There was the guy who ended up faking a suicide attempt so they would take him to the suicide watch where there is supposed to be 24-hour one-on-one observation because he was so sick.  He died on the suicide watch from pleurisy and a lung infection that could have been easily found and treated if anybody in the prison just got out a stethoscope and listened to his breathing.

These aren’t even death penalty victims.  The guy in the wheelchair was in on drug charges, drugs he readily admits he was using, but only in an attempt to relieve the constant pain he feels as a result of the injury that led to his being in a wheelchair. 

And yet when I mention these stories, the attitude is, so what?  They are criminals.  They deserve it.  Do they?  Do they really deserve this kind of torture and abject inhumane treatment?

Comment #28: speedbudget  on  09/23  at  07:36 AM

Troy Davis wasn’t executed.  He was ritually sacrificed.

At least any board-certified anesthesiologist who had anything to do with this or other executions will now lose their board certification.

Comment #29: Ms Kate  on  09/23  at  08:48 AM

speedbudget,

If someone isn’t convicted yet, or is serving a short sentence, chances are that that person is in jail, not prison. It’s a small distinction, but an important one. Prisons are either Federal or under control of the various states, while jails are run by counties. Private prisons are under the control of state or Federal prison agencies, and they’re supposed to follow the same procedures. I haven’t heard of any private jails, but I imagine they’re out there somewhere. And some bits of prisons are privatized: usually the kitchens, commissary (inmate stores), and more and more often the medical care.

It’s a distinction that sometimes makes a difference, but the general state of prisons and jails and the civil rights issues at each are all pretty much the same. The inmates at the prison I have discussed the differences with suggest that the jails have more drugs and worse living conditions, while the prisons have a lot more stability and tedium. Medical care at each is… well, you’d have to be desperate to go there for the medical care. (And yeah, some people are that desperate. What a country!)

Comment #30: 3letterjon  on  09/23  at  09:54 AM

http://www.ginandtacos.com/2011/09/22/pulling-the-switch/ has a lot of information I haven’t seen anywhere else. It’s an important read.

Comment #31: 3letterjon  on  09/23  at  10:40 AM

The death penalty is, like everything else in this country, a punishment for being poor.  I don’t feel like you can separate the death penalty out from the Class War in general.

Comment #32: Punditus Maximus  on  09/23  at  11:06 AM

Two points worth noting on the Illinois cases:
One, Illinois prided itself on having a model death penalty system, with top-notch judicial procedure and absolute confidence in never condemning an innocent person.
Two, the floodgates were opened by undergrads (mostly freshmen, IIRC) at Northwestern investigating death penalty cases as a project for a criminal justice class.

Put those two together—that the “best possible” capital judicial system has at least a 6% false conviction rate, and that a class project provides better legal representation for the defendants than what they had at trial—and I’m absolutely convinced we should have no death penalty in any case.

Comment #33: Jon  on  09/23  at  11:08 AM

On the same day that Troy Davis was executed, the state of Texas put Lawrence Brewer to death.  For some unknown reason, I haven’t seen a single article—and, of course, I could easily have missed one—from my friends on the left protesting the execution of Mr Brewer.

Comment #34: Dana  on  09/24  at  12:49 PM

For some unknown reason, I haven’t seen a single article—and, of course, I could easily have missed one—from my friends on the left protesting the execution of Mr Brewer

Perhaps because you’re a piss-poor researcher, Dana:

If you are inclined to question capital punishment, it is not hard to protest the scheduled execution tonight of Troy Davis in Georgia. His case contains much doubt about his guilt, and the racial aspect (black man as victim of white-dominated justice system) is undeniable. What really tests a principled position against the death penalty are cases like Lawrence Brewer.

That’s why I was happy to receive, just a few minutes ago, an e-mail from the National Coalition Against the Death Penalty. Of course, it calls for last-minute action to save Davis. But it also includes this key section:

“We should also note the odd juxtaposition of the two executions scheduled for exactly the same time this evening. At 7 pm EDT in Georgia, racism plays a part in the execution of Troy Davis. At 6 pm CDT in Texas, Lawrence Brewer is to be executed for his participation in the infamous racist hate crime dragging murder of James Byrd in Jasper, Texas, in 1998. Please join NCADP in opposing the executions of both men. We stand against all executions without reservation.”

http://www.thenation.com/blog/163536/other-execution-tonight—-man-who-dragged-james-byrd-jr-his-death

This was the 5th article using Google search execution Texas dragged, a rather simple search that even someone of a blinkered, limited mentality should be able to accomplish, even using different search terms.

Am I going to have to quote J. S. Mill again, Dana?

 

Comment #35: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  09/24  at  02:11 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.