It
is a daunting task to defend the rights of someone accused of
murder. No matter how conflicting a concept like this may be the
noble spirit of justice must prevail and we must grant rights to
even those accused of heinous crimes. This is
especially crucial because the imperfect nature of our justice
system has led to people being convicted of crimes they did not
actually commit. This unfortunate reality extends to people on death row.
It is America’s duty to stand as an example to the rest of the world of what it
means to be a free, developed, and civilized society and it is
unthinkable for a civilized society to put an innocent person to
death. Despite its highly controversial nature, Texas is well known
for its support and prolific use of execution. To avoid any unnecessary
bloodshed brought on by wrongful convictions it is morally imperative
that Texas abolish the death penalty.
There is no going back
after executing someone. Once someone is gone, they are gone. It would
be horrifying to find out that someone who was put to
death was actually innocent but, according to recent findings, there
is at least one verifiable case of this actually happening. Even
more troubling is that it happened in Texas. In his article “Trial
by Fire”, published in The New Yorker, journalist David
Grann tells the heartbreaking story of Cameron Todd
Willingham of Corsicana, Texas.
Willingham
was tried and convicted for the murder of his three young daughters
by arson and sentenced to death. Concerned with the unconvincing
nature of the evidence against him, the Texas Forensic Science Commission
hired former CIA scientist Dr. Craig Beyler to review the
facts of the case. Dr. Beyler found that the original arson
investigation that led to the conviction was based on “flawed
science” and that the house fire that took the lives
of Willingham’s daughters was actually caused by a faulty
radiator. Willingham was simply not guilty. Dr.
Beyler turned his report into then-Governor Rick Perry’s
office who arrogantly chose to ignore it.
 |
| Former Gov. Rick Perry |
Cameron
Todd Willingham was executed by lethal injection on February 17,
2004 after twelve long years on death row for a crime he did not
commit. This is the unthinkable yet inevitable outcome of our
state’s reverence towards execution. Willingham’s three daughters were not
brought back to life with his death and no one received closure. All
that happened was an innocent man was murdered by his home state in front of
his father and stepmother. This tragedy cannot be allowed to happen
again.
Despite
this grave affair people who live in Texas still seem to be
rather proud of the continued use of the death
penalty. According to a 2012 poll conducted by the University of
Texas and published in the Texas Tribune, 73% of
Texans polled either strongly or somewhat support the death penalty.
The state has executed almost five times as many prisoners as the next highest
state, Oklahoma. This is an alarming statistic. It paints Texas as a
trigger-happy, reactionary state with a bloodlust that it fulfills by
executing someone whenever it can, not unlike a violent
murderer. Murder is a crime of violence committed by
someone who has blinded themselves to everything except their wrath.
It is the most atrocious sin a human being can commit. Anyone who is
capable of violently taking another person’s
life is, without exception, utterly disconnected from
reality. For the state of Texas to continue to carry out murder
under the veil of ‘justice’ is sending the wrong message.
The
message Texas is sending is especially grim since this practice is not even
achieving the goal it is ostensibly meant to achieve. Senator Ron
Paul poised in his weekly column, “If the death penalty is an effective
deterrent, why do jurisdictions without the death penalty have a lower crime
rate than jurisdictions with the death penalty?” This does not necessarily mean
that Texas has five times the crime as Oklahoma, but it does show that we are
the most prolific users of a form of punishment that
has clearly been proven to be ineffective. Texans should be
ashamed of how this looks in the eyes of the rest of the country.
Even
more despicable is the fact that while the rest of the nation
is appalled at how dedicated to and
efficient Texas has gotten at the execution
process, other conservative states have begun to
abolish this useless and barbaric practice. Nebraska
recently became the first conservative state in decades to abolish
the death penalty with legislators in Kansas, Montana, Wyoming, South
Dakota, and Kentucky attempting to follow suit. This is a startling
development because conservative states are typically the strongest supporters
of the death penalty. However, “Repealing the death penalty may be easier
in Nebraska than states where capital punishment is more ingrained in the
culture." This is obviously referring to Texas whose pride
in the death penalty is well known and something the rest of the
nation looks down on. One major reason for our continued usage is the fact that “[the judges
in Texas' appeals court] are elected to office and…they require a
record of toughness on criminals in order to win re-election." Having to
appeal to voters’ bloodthirstiness with executions is sickening.
A
look at the monetary statistics may appease those not convinced by crime
rates or the inherent morbidity of execution. Would it not be more
expensive to keep someone convicted of murder alive in a cell for the
rest of their lives than it would be to simply execute them? This is a
common misconception death penalty supporters have and the answer is a
resounding, “No.” Those convicted of murder must go through two trials.
One is to assess their guilt, and the other is to see if their
crime makes them eligible for the death penalty. This alone costs Texan
taxpayers millions of dollars. The cost of attorney fees
for defending someone in a capital case, a case where the death penalty is
considered, is four times more expensive than in a non-capital case. Once convicted,
the inmate is allowed to file for appeals. The labyrinthine appeals process can
take years leaving the inmate on death row for decades. As a result, not only
do the costs to taxpayers add up over that time, but the families of the
victims have to endure this draining process instead of moving on.
It
is the families of the victims that supporters of the death penalty
claim deserve to see the prisoners pay for their crimes. The only way for
the prisoners to truly pay for what they have done is to lose their life.
This ‘eye for an eye’ mentality contradicts many of Texas’
predominantly Christian values. Israel Santana, a criminal defense
attorney from Houston and a deacon at his local church, was on his way to
Huntsville to watch the execution of Robert James Campbell, the man
who murdered his niece. According to his interview with the New York
Times, Santana admitted, “I will not lie and say there is not a battle
within me… I’m sure in my heart, before the needle is put in, I’ll forgive
him.” This is an absurd contradiction of religious values and shows us
that even after the long and drawn out execution process those hurt by the
initial crime are still fighting an internal emotional battle that either may
or may not go away when the prisoner is executed. Campbell’s execution was
eventually called off due to his diagnosis of mental illness, so it stands to
reason that Santana’s internal struggle is still going on. If the possibility
of execution were taken away, Santana could accept that his niece’s killer was
in jail for the rest of his life and simply move on.
Another
example of this desire for executions contradicting religious beliefs is
the recent execution of Licho Escamilla. According to Texas Department of
Criminal Justice records, among Escamilla’s last words were an appeal to the
State of Texas, “Pope Francis…has asked the State of Texas to switch my
death sentence to life in prison. But the State of Texas has refused to
listen to God’s children, they will have to take that up with God.” For
the State of Texas to ignore the Pope himself when at any other time they
would adhere to his request is an abhorrent example of death penalty
supporters choosing to drop their
beliefs momentarily just so they can enact revenge on another human
being.
This
morbid fondness for killing those who have allegedly killed others needs to
cease. There is nothing to be gained by committing a court-sanctioned act of
revenge. As the rest of the country seems to be moving on from executions, so
must Texas. Our history of dedication to using the death
penalty on any who have allegedly killed may be one of Texas’ claims
to fame but the support behind it is misguided and cruel. By
educating the supporters of the death penalty as to why it is needless,
wasteful, and truly a heinous violation of human rights we can
hopefully see this practice put to an end once and for all.
Grann,
David. "Trial by Fire." NewYorker.com. The New Yorker, 7
Sept. 2009. Web. 14 Nov. 2015.
Ramsey,
Ross. "UT/TT Poll: Texans Stand Behind Death Penalty, by Ross
Ramsey." The Texas Tribune. N.p., 24 May 2012. Web. 29 Nov.
2015.
Paul,
Ron. "Death Penalty: The Ultimate Corrupt, Big Government
Program. "The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. The Ron
Paul Institute, 14 June 2015. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.
Jablonski,
Ray. "Other Conservative States May Follow Nebraska in Abolishing Death
Penalty." Cleveland.com. Northeast Ohio Media Group, 31 May 2015.
Web. 05 Dec. 2015.
Walpin,
Ned. "Why Is Texas #1 in Executions?" PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 29
Nov. 2015.
Erb,
Kelly Phillips. "Considering the Death Penalty; Your Tax Dollars at
Work." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 1 May 2014. Web. 14 Nov. 2015.
Fernandez,
Manny, and John Schwartz. "Confronted on Execution, Texas Proudly Says It
Kills Efficiently." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 May
2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.
"Offender
Information." Death Row Information. Texas Department of Criminal
Justice, 14 Oct. 2015. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.
No comments:
Post a Comment