Troy Davis
Unless there is a last minute reprieve, Troy Davis will be executed today in Georgia, for a crime he probably didn’t commit. You can read about his case by clicking here.
Although I generally fight to be optimistic about these things, I feel little optimism today, and although I have signed petitions and made phone calls and written letters, I suspect there is little left to do now except pray for all parties to be granted peace and comfort and grace.
I won’t rehash the facts of Mr. Davis’s case. It’s all over the news and all over the internet. I do, however, want to take a moment of your time and tell you why I don’t believe in the death penalty, under any circumstances. Here is my thinking:
- It is unfairly applied along racial lines. Proportionally, far more minorities are executed than whites. Clearly, we are not objective and do not have the cultural maturity to hand down objective “justice.”
- The wrong person has too often been executed as will happen, I believe, in the Troy Davis case. Better five guilty men sit in jail, alive, than one innocent man be killed.
- Most cases are decided on eye-witness testimony, which science-based research tells us is wildly inaccurate.
Those are arguments we often hear, and I agree with them. However, for me there is more.
- For one thing, I don’t believe it helps the survivors, with whom I grieve. (And as a survivor of violent crime, I have some limited experience of the emotions such an event creates.) Executions focus on revenge, not on healing. I’m no Pollyanna – should some dreadful person kill someone I love, there is no doubt I would want that person killed — drawn and quartered, lowered slowly into boiling oil and/or flayed alive — and I’d doubtless want to do the deed myself. I would want it with every cell in my body. BUT, that would be me at the worst moment of my life, filled with the insanity of violent grieving and loss. Concentrating on the death of the killer keeps me locked, metaphorically speaking, in a small room with him/her, focused entirely on that person. Focusing on another person’s death will only postpone the work of healing I must eventually do. Some say this would be solved by a quick execution, instead of the decades-long process of appeals we now face in many cases. Nonsense — a lynching never healed anyone.
This is not to be confused with a lack of desire for justice. I believe in justice; there are consequences for our actions, and someone who commits a grievous crime should be put away for a long time so he or she doesn’t hurt anyone else. Some people are, I’m sorry to say, beyond earthly rehabilitation, the best thing for all concerned is that they live apart from society.
- Having said that — I simply do not believe in state-sanctioned murder. For the state to give in to my basest instincts (my desire for revenge), and to support those instincts by killing someone, no matter how ‘evil’ that person may be, is for the state to join me in my madness. I want my government to be better than me at my worst moment. I want the state to be the voice of reason, wiser than me, not a pandering sycophant hoping to win my vote.
I believe that if we want to live in a non-violent society, we must behave — personally and institutionally — in a non-violent way. If we want the people in our land to be non-violent, our government must be non-violent. When Rick (I-chat-with-God) Perry proudly announces that as governor of Texas he executed over 200 people, and the audience to whom he is speaking cheers, I believe we should be horrified–we would be if the leader of Iran, or a tribal warlord in Somalia said the same thing.
Indeed, the death penalty is not the deterrent some suggest it is. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 88% of criminologists agree it does nothing to deter crime. In fact, it seems murder rates are highest (6% of all deaths) in states with the death penalty, and lowest (3.8%) in the Northeast, where there is no death penalty.
We probably won’t be able to save Troy Davis. We should be ashamed of ourselves. If any good comes from his death, let it be this: let it be the last. Let us be better than our worst-moment blood-thirsty impulses.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
FusunA
Ben Russell
Linda Shiue
Ben Sen
Caitlin Kelly
Bob Calhoun
Salon.com
Comments
I do NOT oppose capital punishment…and I am of that mind for humanitarian reasons. Allow me to give my reasons for that stance.
I agree with you that some people cannot be allowed to live in society—they simply are too savage and uncaring of what they do to others. They are dangerous…and must be segregated from society.
Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the most frequently offered alternative to execution.
I consider life in prison without the possibility of parole to be much, much less humane than execution; therefore I oppose it rather than execution.
If some alternative to the “life in prison without the possibility of parole” could be suggested, I might be persuaded to adopt that in preference to execution, but I’ve not heard any alternative of that sort suggested.
Can you conceive of one?
By the way, I am not anywhere near as convinced of this man's innocence as you.
How do you reverse a death penalty conviction once the sentence has been executed? Do you think no one is wrongly convicted and sentenced or do you think the collateral damage of some innocent people being put to death by the state is worth it?
How many witnesses have to recant their statements that resulted in the guilty verdict before you will consider that there may be a miscarriage of justice? I ask this because 7 of the 9 witnesses in Mr. Davis' trial have recanted and that weighs heavy in my mind.
And yes, I have considered the horrors of life long incarceration. Certainly I THINK I would prefer death myself, but I don't know, not being faced with this horrible choice. I am a firm believer in restorative justice, rather than the revenge-based, punitive, non-rehabilitative model we now work with (and I have spend a good deal of time teaching in prisons, so I have some experience 'inside.")
Still, one can't deny some offenders are not going to be rehabilitated, even in the best of possible systems, due to whatever severe dissociative or anti-social madness they labor under. I also believe in evil. I've seen it.
I wonder if execution, humanely done, might not be a choice we offered the inmate? A bizarre thought, and perhaps that would raise the issue of sanity. Or perhaps, for those few deemed totally outside any human effort at redemption, the practice of some First Nations tribes could be adopted -- lifelong isolation, not in a prison as we know it, but on a patch of land, or an island, where the person would have to be largely self-sufficient. Penal colonies come to mind, of course, but that's not what I mean. Another subject, too complicated for this space . . .
It's certainly a conundrum and I'm not suggesting there are easy answers, only saying that my soul's voice, my gut, all speak out against the death penalty.
Thanks for the reply. I understand the passion you have on the subject, because I was there at one time. A great deal of reflection has gone into the change of heart I had on the issue.
Couple of things in reply, if I may:
If life in prison becomes the norm—if executions are finally suspended in favor of life in prison without the possibility of parole, I think it incumbent on a decent society to offer, as you warily suggested, the opportunity for a clean, quick death as an alternative. I think I could buy into that…in fact, I would accept that as a reasonable alternative to capital punishment. I see nothing even remotely “bizarre” in that possible alternative.
I do think the chances of our society ever allowing that as an alternative are astronomical against it happening, but I certainly would support that as an alternative.
The “Escape from New York” scenario also would be acceptable to me in preference to execution, but that would be an even longer shot at acceptance by society. I would love to see violent criminals segregated in a way that would not impose the harshness and inhumanity of today’s prisons on them—no matter how disgusting their crimes.
I understand guilt is not a factor in your opposition to capital punishment…and I want you to understand that innocence is not a factor in my opposition to abolition. If I were ever wrongly convicted of murder and knew I would most likely spend all the rest of my life in prison (or a significant portion of the rest of my life there) I would want execution more than anything imaginable. No way I would want to spend significant amounts of time in prison whether guilty or wrongly convicted…and no way I want to see anyone else spend significant amounts of time in prison either.
Let me respond to Anthony here also. Anthony, you wrote:
How do you reverse a death penalty conviction once the sentence has been executed?
You don’t; you can’t. But innocent people die every day. It happens.
Do you think no one is wrongly convicted and sentenced or do you think the collateral damage of some innocent people being put to death by the state is worth it?
I suspect people are wrongly convicted. The system is not perfect. I do think that the “collateral damage of some innocent people being put to death by the state” is worth it. Society gets protected at the expense of the innocent all the time. Innocent people are killed to protect your right, and my right, to be relatively safe in our homes and on our streets. I wish it were not so…truly I do. But it is so…and I most assuredly do not feel it is better that 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent die. The 10 guilty may end up causing dozens of other innocents to die.
There are consequences to any decisions on this issue.
How many witnesses have to recant their statements that resulted in the guilty verdict before you will consider that there may be a miscarriage of justice? I ask this because 7 of the 9 witnesses in Mr. Davis' trial have recanted and that weighs heavy in my mind.
The wise ass in me wanted to type, 214! But I will do away with the levity in this situation and simply say that the recantations are admissions of lying…and who is to say which really is the lie, the original statement or the recantation. Supposedly there was pressure initially to make statements…and supposedly there was pressure to recant. I cannot make a decision on that…I have to accept the norm of a jury trial and its result.
I appreciate the concerns you have…and take my word for it, I have mine. But the way it works in this country is that a trial is held and a verdict rendered.
The racial disparity drives me nuts…just as the “poorness” disparity does. But the people at the bottom of the ladder (I am one of those at the bottom) always get the sludge. It goes with the territory.
A life sentence without parole doesn't include automatic reviews and habeus corpus appeals. It doesn't require special and expensive treeatment.
To give a moral argument: a mistake in a life sentence does not usually result in a wrongful death. The lost time spent in prison for a crime not committed is a tragedy, to be sure. But a wrongful death at the hands of the government is intolerable to me.
These convicted killers are our sons and daughters. They are our neighbors children that we once saw playing as a child, smiling and laughing. You can't convince me that their humanity is gone because they chose to take a life, or worse, under terrible circumstances, even of their own making.
All evil is relative and all behavior is learned. It is easy to judge another after such a terrible act. But it is also worthy of us to trust in each person's ability to overcome our transgressions and find a way to atone for our failures.
I believe that even the worst of us will seek redemption given enough time.
citing Perry and his fans
That's all, that anybody should make the case for continuing this barbarian practice is simply, well, barbaric!
I know,a lot of people and organisations have tried to get this man free.There is very little I can do,but I thought that perhaps a lot of people might read my comment and bring new wind into the issue.I definitely hope for the man to be free of imprisonment,of penalty and most of all,of the still existing prejudice which makes life ever so hard being of the wrong coulor of skin.
TROY DAVIS,I prey for your freedom.
Some people simply have made up their minds that it is both those things…and doing so shuts out the reality of alternate arguments—which I have made.
It is quite possible to conceive of alternatives to capital punishment as being much more inhumane than execution. Some of the countries that ban capital punishment have penal systems that are even worse than ours—where each day in prison is a day in Hell.
That kind of punishment is the true evil…the true thirst for revenge…the true barbarity.
In any case, I will be leaving the discussion now. Once someone like Roberto introduces the absoluteness of “it is a barbarity”…and suggests that because I have an alternate perspective of the issue, I am perforce a barbarian, the discussion is off the tracks.
I don't know whether Troy Davis is guilty or innocent. It doesn't matter. The fact that Georgia would execute this man even though there are many with doubts about his guilt is mind-boggling to me. If we find proof of his innocence a year from now, he can't be brought back, and no apology to his friends and family will suffice.
On a side note, I'm well convinced that Texas executed an innocent man in Cameron Todd Willingham. The fact that Gov. Rick Perry allowed his execution is not why his candidacy makes my skin crawl. It's that when an investigation into his mistaken execution was initiated, Perry obstructed it by removing several of the panel members and replacing them with his flunkies.
America should join the rest of the civilized world and abolish capital punishment.
A letter to Canadians from the Honourable Jack Layton
August 20, 2011
Toronto, Ontario
Dear Friends,
Tens of thousands of Canadians have written to me in recent weeks to wish me well. I want to thank each and every one of you for your thoughtful, inspiring and often beautiful notes, cards and gifts. Your spirit and love have lit up my home, my spirit, and my determination.
Unfortunately my treatment has not worked out as I hoped. So I am giving this letter to my partner Olivia to share with you in the circumstance in which I cannot continue.
I recommend that Hull-Aylmer MP Nycole Turmel continue her work as our interim leader until a permanent successor is elected.
I recommend the party hold a leadership vote as early as possible in the New Year, on approximately the same timelines as in 2003, so that our new leader has ample time to reconsolidate our team, renew our party and our program, and move forward towards the next election.
A few additional thoughts:
To other Canadians who are on journeys to defeat cancer and to live their lives, I say this: please don’t be discouraged that my own journey hasn’t gone as well as I had hoped. You must not lose your own hope. Treatments and therapies have never been better in the face of this disease. You have every reason to be optimistic, determined, and focused on the future. My only other advice is to cherish every moment with those you love at every stage of your journey, as I have done this summer.
To the members of my party: we’ve done remarkable things together in the past eight years. It has been a privilege to lead the New Democratic Party and I am most grateful for your confidence, your support, and the endless hours of volunteer commitment you have devoted to our cause. There will be those who will try to persuade you to give up our cause. But that cause is much bigger than any one leader. Answer them by recommitting with energy and determination to our work. Remember our proud history of social justice, universal health care, public pensions and making sure no one is left behind. Let’s continue to move forward. Let’s demonstrate in everything we do in the four years before us that we are ready to serve our beloved Canada as its next government.
To the members of our parliamentary caucus: I have been privileged to work with each and every one of you. Our caucus meetings were always the highlight of my week. It has been my role to ask a great deal from you. And now I am going to do so again. Canadians will be closely watching you in the months to come. Colleagues, I know you will make the tens of thousands of members of our party proud of you by demonstrating the same seamless teamwork and solidarity that has earned us the confidence of millions of Canadians in the recent election.
To my fellow Quebecers: On May 2nd, you made an historic decision. You decided that the way to replace Canada’s Conservative federal government with something better was by working together in partnership with progressive-minded Canadians across the country. You made the right decision then; it is still the right decision today; and it will be the right decision right through to the next election, when we will succeed, together. You have elected a superb team of New Democrats to Parliament. They are going to be doing remarkable things in the years to come to make this country better for us all.
To young Canadians: All my life I have worked to make things better. Hope and optimism have defined my political career, and I continue to be hopeful and optimistic about Canada. Young people have been a great source of inspiration for me. I have met and talked with so many of you about your dreams, your frustrations, and your ideas for change. More and more, you are engaging in politics because you want to change things for the better. Many of you have placed your trust in our party. As my time in political life draws to a close I want to share with you my belief in your power to change this country and this world. There are great challenges before you, from the overwhelming nature of climate change to the unfairness of an economy that excludes so many from our collective wealth, and the changes necessary to build a more inclusive and generous Canada. I believe in you. Your energy, your vision, your passion for justice are exactly what this country needs today. You need to be at the heart of our economy, our political life, and our plans for the present and the future.
And finally, to all Canadians: Canada is a great country, one of the hopes of the world. We can be a better one – a country of greater equality, justice, and opportunity. We can build a prosperous economy and a society that shares its benefits more fairly. We can look after our seniors. We can offer better futures for our children. We can do our part to save the world’s environment. We can restore our good name in the world. We can do all of these things because we finally have a party system at the national level where there are real choices; where your vote matters; where working for change can actually bring about change. In the months and years to come, New Democrats will put a compelling new alternative to you. My colleagues in our party are an impressive, committed team. Give them a careful hearing; consider the alternatives; and consider that we can be a better, fairer, more equal country by working together. Don’t let them tell you it can’t be done.
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.
All my very best,
Jack Layton
web hosting http://www.pickaweb.co.uk/webhostingservice.htm
The two basic instincts of the human being are the instinct of self-preservation and the instinct of the conservation of the species.
I believe that in the future - and hopefully, the near future - a new instinct, a new mechanism, will be added to the two original mechanisms of the human being. I would like to call this new instinct, this new mechanism, the "instinct of nonviolence".
I also believe that the day will come when this instinct will be implanted in the human gene just like the first two instincts, and that it will be more dominant than these first two. In such a way, that when confronted with a particular situation - especially, a negative one - man will act or react in a nonviolent way automatically.
This will transpire when we, as a species have finally integrated the "Principle of Nonviolence" that says, "Treat others like they were Sacred".
And why should we treat others like they were Sacred? Because, they are! And most especially, because, you are!
•••
Sometimes it does. It depends on the person and the situation. My grandfather, a prison guard, was shot and killed during an escape attempt. Another guard was killed, and a third guard wounded. One convict was killed during the escape, and two others were convicted of murder and executed. I had several conversations with my grandmother, and I would say that she was satisfied with the execution of those who murdered her husband.
Concerning whether the death penalty is a deterrence -- several academic studies in the last decade show that it is. One thing that we do know is that prison is not a deterrence to murder. The people who murdered my grandfather were already in prison, so the threat of more prison obviously would not have deterred them.
Whether or not the death penalty deters, we know that someone who is executed will not commit any more murders. There is no such thing as "life in prison." This is because "life in prison" is contingent upon the individual actually being kept in prison. In recent years some legislatures have considered releasing older "lifers" in order to reduce the cost of incarceration. What "life in prison" means is that the person may or may not spend life in prison, depending on future developments and decisions.
While I would never favor the execution of someone whose guilt is in doubt, there are many cases in which the person's guilt is known not just beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond all doubt.
Some crimes simply call for the death penalty. The most recent poster children for the death penalty are the fellows who murdered William Petit's family. Petit himself was badly beaten, and his wife and daughters were tied to their beds, raped, and then died when the house was set on fire. As I recall, one of the women burned to death, and the other two died of smoke inhalation. Since the police had the house surrounded, there wasn't any question of guilt.
For those of you who believe in the death penalty -- I shan't argue. You are as entitled to your opinion as anyone. I will only say again: my faith, my conscience, and my heart tell me it is wrong to kill anyone. This is why I also grieve the death of James Byrd's murderer, Lawrence Brewer.
My prayer is that the families of all those concerned find peace and forgiveness and comfort.
Good bye Troy,rest in peace and feel welcome in the glorious realm of God the Almighty!!!
People have come forward. From Amnesty International's website: "The case against him consisted entirely of witness testimony which contained inconsistencies even at the time of the trial. Since then, all but two of the state's non-police witnesses from the trial have recanted or contradicted their testimony."
I am, however, heartsick that Troy Davis was put to death while I slept. I had hoped for a different outcome this morning.
I think the only way to ensure that innocent people are never executed again is to abolish the death penalty entirely. It is not worth losing one more innocent life.
Why is it that in every "execution", it is never written for what it really is - "US FINALLY KILLED TROY DAVIS".
The leading cause to violence is almost certainly early child abuse and bullying that escalates throughout life and leads to greater violence and crime as well as wars based on lies. I have written more about this on blogs including one about Troy Davis whom I also believe has almost certainly been wrongfully executed.
Another killer, Paul Bernardo, 'only' three schoolgirls, is in solitary life imprisonment. He was 30ish when convicted, so he should have a good 40 years sitting by himself in a 9x9 or whatever it is, with one hour of daylight/exercise per day.
Our killer with the biggest body count, whatzisname, Mr. Pig Farmer, is considerably older, so his time sitting alone will be shorter.
I've known some killers in prison, and those in the general population have a sort of life. But I've visited guys in super-max solitary and it's pretty awful.
Anyway, that's sort of beside the point. Eye-for-eye might have been seen as just for a tribe wandering around in the desert. We're settled now, and have prisons - that's how you keep people out of circulation who must NOT ever be let loose.