One Thousand Ghosts
Fifty-seven year-old Kenneth Lee Boyd should be the 1,000th person to be executed since capital punishment resumed in the US in 1976. His execution is schedule for 2:00 AM, in less than three hours, in Raleigh, North Carolina.
But this grim milestone mustn’t hide a heartening fact: the death penalty is waning in the US.
The historians will have to cope with this paradox: it is under the presidency of a Texan in favor of tough criminal justice, George W.Bush, that the death penalty shrank. Since 1999, the number of death sentence fell by 60% and the number of executions declined by 40%. A Gallup poll shows that 64% of Americans support the death penalty today, down from 80% in 1994.
Several reasons explain this fall. DNA testing revealed the risk of killing innocent people. While 1000 people have been executed since 1976, 122 people who were about to be executed have been released from the death row: a one to eight ratio!
Another important factor has undermined capital punishment: for the last few years, many States (including Texas, last September) have given juries the option of a sentence of life without parole. “Until then, the juries often hesitated to sentence the defendants to prison, because they feared that murderers would be back in the streets one day. So they preferred the death penalty. But if they can opt for a life sentence without parole, the situation is very different," Richard Dieter, the director of the Death Penalty Information Center, told me this morning.
According to Dieter, there is an even more powerful argument for a complete abolition of the death penalty: the increasingly expensive cost of the system. A trial is very expansive when the death penalty is involved. An execution has an average cost of 2 million dollars, affirms Dieter; while, the "plea bargain" system is much cheaper: about 50, 000 dollars for the sentence, and 25 000 dollars per year for the incarceration expenses.
I’m amazed to hear such a practical argument against execution, because in my country the cause for abolition was just a question of principle, taken up by big thinkers like Condorcet, Victor Hugo, or Albert Camus. Before its abolition in 1981, the death penalty was considered by its opponents as an outrage to our consciences—nobody would have had the weird idea of calculating its cost and comparing it to the alternatives. But I must confess the French are not the most practical people on earth (a legend even says that we sometimes ask: “It may work in practice, but does it work in theory?”) You Americans are incredibly pragmatic. “No matter if the cat is black or white, as long as he can catch the mouse” should not be a Deng Xiao-Ping proclamation, it should be your national motto
Comments (13)
I was part of the 20% in 1994 and the 36% currently who oppose "capital punishment" in the US, with every fiber of my being. Capital punishment is the taking of a life with malice of forethought...a murder is always a murder. I opposed it in the 70's and I will oppose it until the day I die!!!
December 1, 2005 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's always been a racial and class sub-text to the capital punishment debate that bothers me. I wonder if, with the problems France has been experiencing with its Muslim minority, you won't see an uptick in support for "tough" approaches to crime, as happens here.
December 1, 2005 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we really wanted to get tough on crime we should make prisons far less "hospitable" and make the time "hard time", then lock up murderers in a cell and let them rot there until they die. Killing them just ends their misery...
I agree, in the US, capital punishment is racially (and socially) unjust...if you're poor and a minority you have a much better chance of being murdered by the State.
December 1, 2005 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to say that I don't feel strongly about the death penalty either way. Any society needs to be exceptionally careful when it grants to its legitimate authorities the power to take the life of its members. But it still seems to me that some crimes can justify the use of the death penalty.
If it were put to a vote, however, I would vote to abolish it. So, the death penalty to me is an exercise in accepting democracy.
For a democracy to work, everyone must accept at the base level that sometimes they will lose; that sometimes they will be in the minority.
That is not to say that we should stop trying to convince people that we are right. But it is to say that we should not treat our opponents condescendingly when we lose.
And, to take it one step further, if a country has a functioning democracy, it means that we cannot always expect the country to enact policies that conform to our worldview.
I think this will be a test for this country, and for the rest of the Western world, as democracies emerge in traditionally oriental areas such as Afghanistan and (hopefully) Iraq.
December 1, 2005 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
right now.
Mr. Boyd is scheduled to die in 9 minutes, and I'm sure he will.
But the state of North Carolina has no more right to take the life of Kenneth Boyd any more than Kenneth Boyd had to end the life of his victims.
Lock him away and throw away the key, sure. But kill him, no.
Two wrongs never make a right.
Unless things change in the next six minutes, I wil be ashamed to be a North Carolinian.
December 1, 2005 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The death penalty is something I've found myself feeling contradictory about. I am opposed to it as it stand - government sponsored murder. Yet oddly enough, if something were to happen to someone close to me (i.e. my nephew), I wonder if I wouldn't be driven to kill the individual who did it if I could.
December 1, 2005 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who decides when, where, why and how a heinous crime is committed? During the guilt phase, a defendant does not want the case to be about him, but everyone else, e.g., the cops, the victim, other co-defendants. But, during punishment, its back to being all about the defendant again, what a tough life he has, and all his excuses.
The death penalty is like abortion. Both elevate emotions to a boil, but no one has a practical solution that address all circumstances. Republicans, like Bush, pretend to be pro-life on one hand but never commute a death sentence on the other.
Perhaps "pro-embryo" is a more appropriate description of their position. They certainly aren't pro-law enforcement. Law enforcement, e.g., more cops, more prison beds, more probation resources, is too expensive for them.
Take the death penalty off the table, and what is the maximum range of punishment? Life in prison without the possibility of parole? How long will that last? Until the next legislature determines that a prisoner like Tookie Williams has sufficiently rehabilitated himself to be released to the streets long after the horrible nature of his crime has been forgotten?
An Australian was executed by hanging today in Indonesia for possession of 400 grams of heroin. He wanted to help his twin brother pay off his gambling debts. The Indonesians claim they do not have the drug problem that exists in the U.S. Hmmmmmmmm.
December 1, 2005 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
>> You Americans are incredibly pragmatic.
Except when it comes to launching wars that everyone with half a brain knew we would lose, while in the process humiliating ourselves, killing and maiming thousands of our own people and many more Iraqis, creating a new generation of terrorists, and all of that for a mere half a trillion bucks....
But, yep, except for such small details, we're very pragmatic.
December 1, 2005 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
An Australian was executed by hanging today in Indonesia for possession of 400 grams of heroin. He wanted to help his twin brother pay off his gambling debts. The Indonesians claim they do not have the drug problem that exists in the U.S.
The Australian, Van Tuang Nguyen, was executed in Singapore, not Indonesia. You know, Singapore, which is (supposedly) a democracy and (supposedly) our friend. Of course, there were a quick sentancing without a jury, the person had no prior conviction and one appeal. They did not even allow his mother to hug him. It totally disgusts me. I am staying in Australia now and it is a big deal down here.
I am against the death penalty. But, admittedly, I don't feel too upset when serial killers get executed. But this is just upsetting. The punishment is so disproportionate to the crime. The Singapore government is really barbaric, but they always get a free pass from everyone.
You might be referring to the Schappelle Corby trial, where she was sentanced to 20 years in Indonesia for carrying 400 grams of pot. Although she claimed she was innocent.
December 2, 2005 5:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
The death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent. It is also clear that at least a couple of percent of the people who get executed are innocent. It is also very expensive to prosecute a death penalty case. The death penalty cheapens life and creates a climate where murder is more acceptable. Many people such as Tookie Williams are actively contributing to society now and it is these rehabilitated criminals who young kids trust because they have been there. He is doing a lot of good now. Life in prison aint no picnic either.
We have the death penalty because we are an overly religious country. I'll bet that 65% of the poulation that support the death penalty are the same 65% that believe that they are going to go to heaven when they die and that God created us in our present form.
December 2, 2005 6:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not much of a paradox. George is in charge of the Federal death chambers, but it's the states that tend to execute people.
It is Texas that refuses to shut down the machine for a while to look into DNA. It was Illinois that did it. It was Mark Warner, outgoing governor of Virginia (ahem, "Commonwealth of,") who passed on the honor of the 1000th.
If other nations want to weigh in on our penchant for killing prisoners - and as our friends, they ought to - they should learn the names of governors. Start with Michael Easley.
December 2, 2005 6:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm aware of that, Daniel. The paradox is that in this "Bush era", this country, supposed to be turning right, is actually more and more liberal on this issue and several others.
December 2, 2005 7:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
As someone with a long time anti-death-penalty opinion based on what I think are atypical reasons, who has been following public opinion on this for a long time, I don't see any paradox.
I see a slow shift in opinion happening because of concerted P.R. efforts by groups such as The Innocence Project (the latter ironically founded by Barry Sheck and Peter Neufeld of the O.J. trial--whatever you think of O.J.'s acquittal and the whole circus, what it did is get these two some funds and some celebrity which they used to do some good! The twists of fate!)
Law students have worked hard in many places to find evidence of innocents on death row. The press has complied with making a big deal of it when they have done so, because it makes for "good story." One then ends up with something like a Republican governor of Illinois taking the death penalty situation into his own hands, and the prosecutors of the state of New York all reluctant to touch the penalty. This also gets covered.
The public hears of these stories over the years and rethinks the usefulness of the penalty as a deterrent. Couple that with coverage of stories of victim's families admitting that 'vengeance is not mine' but the lord's or simply finding life imprisonment adequate punishment.
I really believe that it's the result of news coverage. (Even the coverage by the popular shows that deal what goes on inside prisons helps this....people see that it's not true that convicts are 'coddled.") It's the good side of the public interest in crime story news coverage which so many newsies decry. They develop a more nuanced view of crime and punishment from following single human interest stories on same. Those stories are partly driven by activism by lawyers working pro bono; there's been a lot of good work done on this front over the last decade. We're finally seeing the results in the polls.
Need I say it? I think it's a perfect example of the type of thing we so many decry when it's coming from the other side being put to good use. P.R. tactics are not inherently evil.
By the way, if your suprise is based upon the idea that most Americans have a vengeful attitude in general, personally I think you are mistaken. I don't even think of Bush as having that attitude. Not with 9/11, not with Iraq, and not with Tucker case in Texas when he was governor. The smugness of Bush about things like this, that's not vengeance, that's a preconception that the 'system' you are operating by is correct, right and true. All you have to do is induce those who are open to doubts that the system is not so; the majority of Americans are more obssessed with fairness than vengeance. Show them somethings "not fair" and you're halfway there. (You can relate this to how the Iraq war was not sold--Saddam could be seen as "not playing fair," Osama of course, the same.)
December 2, 2005 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink