| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"Robert Cohen" |
| Date: |
17 Dec 2005 12:47:29 PM |
| Object: |
Re: The Cap Punishment of Tookie Williams Isn't Unfair |
I paid for this non-microphone:
Globalist
The Quality of Mercy Is No Longer Mightiest
E-Mail This
Printer-Friendly
Save Article
By ROGER COHEN
International Herald Tribune
Published: December 17, 2005
"The State of California just killed an innocent man!" That was the
lapidary cry from supporters of Stanley Tookie Williams in the San
Quentin Prison death chamber Tuesday after an injection of lethal
chemicals ended the life of the convicted killer, but did nothing to
end controversy over the death penalty or Williams's odyssey from gang
founder to peace guru.
Skip to next paragraph
More from IHT.com:
Front Page
Business
Editorials & Commentary
Enlarge This Image
Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Scene out side the gates at San Quentin State Prison where Stanley
Tookie Williams was executed shortly after midnight Monday.
There is something about the Williams case that is deeply troubling.
It's not the predictable outcry from Europe, where Arnold
Schwarzenegger, the Austrian-born California governor who refused
clemency to Williams, has been branded a real-life "Terminator" for his
decision. We all know where Europe stands on the death penalty.
Nor is it the quarter-century of litigation since the four murders in
1979 of which Williams was convicted. Justice deferred tends to be
justice denied, but the repeated legal scrutiny of the case in state
and federal courts reinforced the credibility of the verdict.
Nor, finally, is it the scene in the death chamber, terrible as that
was, with a sweating prison nurse struggling for 15 minutes to find a
usable vein in Williams's muscular arm (he was once a bodybuilder like
Schwarzenegger), relatives of Williams's victims battling for
composure, and his supporters yelling their outrage.
No, what is most disquieting for many people is the issue of
redemption, which he placed front and center, arguing in effect that
his salvation from sin and commitment to a life's work steering kids
away from gangland violence amounted to a persuasive reason for
clemency, or to put it more simply, for mercy.
Redemption is a question we all grapple with; it is one we may dwell on
particularly at the end of another year. You don't have to be religious
to believe that sin is a universal human condition; and you don't have
to be a Christian to be moved by the belief in Jesus Christ's sacrifice
for the redemption of mankind.
Yet Schwarzenegger, in his five-page explanation of his decision, made
short - almost sneering - shrift of Williams's plea for mercy on the
basis of redemption. He wrote: "Without an apology and atonement for
these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption. In this
case, the one thing that would be the clearest indication of complete
remorse and full redemption is the one thing Williams will not do."
I think, on the basis of repeated court findings and the volume of
evidence, that Williams committed those murders and I can't say why he
would not apologize for them directly. That secret he took to the
grave.
But to claim, as Schwarzenegger did, the nonexistence of redemption in
the face of Williams's repeated apologies for gangland violence and his
earnest attempts over many years to turn youths, especially poor young
black men, away from crime seems to me at once facile and grave.
Nowhere is it written that redemption is impossible without confession.
Mercy has more to do with an invocation of grace than a measurement of
facts. Clemency must reside more in the instincts of the heart than the
calculations of the mind.
"This is kind of the toughest thing you do when you're governor,"
Schwarzenegger said last month. Well, yes, governor: to take or spare a
human life is a terrible responsibility. The gravity of the call is
such that it surely demands humanity, including the shared knowledge of
sin and redemption, more than political calculation.
But mercy and clemency have gone out of fashion. They require personal
courage and conviction; they may go against prevailing political wisdom
(two-thirds of Californians favor the death penalty).
In the rare case these days when governors do grant clemency, their
decision is almost always based on errors or omissions in the judicial
system, rather than mercy. Indeed, the very word mercy, beautiful as it
is, has come to seem quaintly outmoded.
"Modern governors reveal themselves to be shallow when then they are
unready to talk about mercy and grace as an important part of just
punishment," argued Bryan Stevenson, a professor at New York University
Law School. "We celebrate redemption in so many situations, but refuse
that latitude in a criminal justice system still biased against the
poor, particularly the African-American poor."
Williams was African-American. In the early 1970s he co-founded the
Crips youth gang in south central Los Angeles. The gang and its
countless copycat offshoots have been responsible for numberless
crimes.
In 1997, Williams wrote: "So today I apologize to you all - the
children of America and South Africa - who must cope every day with
dangerous street gangs. I no longer participate in the so-called
gangster lifestyle, and I deeply regret that I ever did."
He went on to say that he had written the "Tookie Speaks Out Against
Gang Violence" children's book series in a bid to "end child-on-child
brutality and black-on-black brutality."
Nobody can say how much impact these publications had. Schwarzenegger
was dismissive: "The continued pervasiveness of gang violence leads one
to question the efficacy of Williams' message," the decision reads.
That's a risible argument, like saying the continued pervasiveness of
teenage pregnancies shows that the efforts of those who speak out
against them are useless. Williams had some effect on a huge social
problem; it's fair to believe that if his life had not ended at 51 he
would have had more.
Williams was also a black man sent in the end to his death by a white
man. Like a lot of black kids, he had it tough, and in his youth he did
heinous things. Social hardship is no excuse for murder, but there is
no escaping the fact that justice is a racial issue in the United
States.
As Stevenson, who is African-American, put it: "Most people of color
believe they are presumed guilty."
That view has a history: slavery, lynchings, police misconduct, justice
denied. By various means, white America has tried to redeem itself from
that terrible past. It has wanted to believe, unlike Schwarzenegger,
that redemption is possible.
E-mail:
Monday: Elisabeth Bumiller on the weekend hawks' nest - ***** Cheney and
Donald Rumsfeld on Chesapeake Bay.
Next Article in International (15 of 15) >Inside NYTimes.com
Bartender, Can
You Break $1,000?
Time Warp of
Christmas Past
Nadine Gordimer's
New Novel
Review: 'Tom
Brokaw Reports'
Chinese Village Cordoned Off
Past 24 Hours |Past 7 Days
Literacy Falls for Graduates From College, Testing Finds
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
A Happy Hipster Hanukkah
Christmas in Santa Fe
Home for Holidays, Rocking the Nest
Go to Complete List
10 New York Hotels for Under $250 a Night
Editorial: Death of an American City
Essay: Children Learn by Monkey See, Monkey Do. Chimps Don't.
A Happy Hipster Hanukkah
Op-Ed Contributor: The Rock Star's Burden
Go to Complete List Copyright 2005 Home
.
|
|
| User: "Fluidly Unsure" |
|
| Title: Re: The Cap Punishment of Tookie Williams Isn't Unfair |
17 Dec 2005 06:06:38 PM |
|
|
Robert Cohen wrote:
[snip]
Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Scene out side the gates at San Quentin State Prison where Stanley
Tookie Williams was executed shortly after midnight Monday.
There is something about the Williams case that is deeply troubling.
Any death sentence carried out is deeply troubling.
[snip]
No, what is most disquieting for many people is the issue of
redemption, which he placed front and center, arguing in effect that
his salvation from sin and commitment to a life's work steering kids
away from gangland violence amounted to a persuasive reason for
clemency, or to put it more simply, for mercy.
I still say it is too late for redemption once your victims are rotting in their
graves and that mercy can't be given decades later.
I can accept that he redeemed himself for starting the crypts (I'll ignore the
blood that indirectly splashed on his hand), but not for the 4 cold-blooded
murders committed at his hands.
Redemption is a question we all grapple with; it is one we may dwell on
particularly at the end of another year. You don't have to be religious
to believe that sin is a universal human condition; and you don't have
to be a Christian to be moved by the belief in Jesus Christ's sacrifice
for the redemption of mankind.
You don't? Someone doesn't understand what many/most non-xTians believe. We
don't accept the meaning of the sacrifice, the need for a wholesale redemption,
or the ability for one killing to redeem all humans.
Yet Schwarzenegger, in his five-page explanation of his decision, made
short - almost sneering - shrift of Williams's plea for mercy on the
basis of redemption. He wrote: "Without an apology and atonement for
these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption. In this
case, the one thing that would be the clearest indication of complete
remorse and full redemption is the one thing Williams will not do."
I think, on the basis of repeated court findings and the volume of
evidence, that Williams committed those murders and I can't say why he
would not apologize for them directly. That secret he took to the
grave.
And to the living victims, that is an insult of the worst kind. By refusing to
acknowledge the situation he seems to be claiming these peoples family/friends
either didn't exist or are too worthless to consider. Not totally logical, but a
human emotion that he refused to try to sooth.
But to claim, as Schwarzenegger did, the nonexistence of redemption in
the face of Williams's repeated apologies for gangland violence and his
earnest attempts over many years to turn youths, especially poor young
black men, away from crime seems to me at once facile and grave.
The gangland violence is not why he was convicted, it was the 4 murders. To
confuse the two is an attempt to blur the scene and confuse others.
Nowhere is it written that redemption is impossible without confession.
Mercy has more to do with an invocation of grace than a measurement of
facts. Clemency must reside more in the instincts of the heart than the
calculations of the mind.
Why is it supposed to be written?
"This is kind of the toughest thing you do when you're governor,"
Schwarzenegger said last month. Well, yes, governor: to take or spare a
human life is a terrible responsibility. The gravity of the call is
such that it surely demands humanity, including the shared knowledge of
sin and redemption, more than political calculation.
The redemption was much more limited than the sin and should be ignored, just as
the "need" for lynchings should be ignored.
Why the speculation about Schwarzeneggers motives? We can only guess but I doubt
if political calculation wasn't in the picture. When a politician does that it
is similar, but not as grave, as someone who throws themselves on a hand-grenade.
But mercy and clemency have gone out of fashion. They require personal
courage and conviction; they may go against prevailing political wisdom
(two-thirds of Californians favor the death penalty).
Is that proof that he was upholding a democracy (using the colloquial definition)?
In the rare case these days when governors do grant clemency, their
decision is almost always based on errors or omissions in the judicial
system, rather than mercy. Indeed, the very word mercy, beautiful as it
is, has come to seem quaintly outmoded.
I'm glad it has evolved the way it did. A blind acceptance is no where near
beautiful and should be outmoded just as a baby grows out of its diapers.
Justice shouldn't be up to someone in the executive branch. Only the judge or
the jury of the time can weigh the evidence against the pleas for mercy. To ask
for it to be done afterwards ignores both the unique situation and any evidence
that no longer exists.
"Modern governors reveal themselves to be shallow when then they are
unready to talk about mercy and grace as an important part of just
punishment," argued Bryan Stevenson, a professor at New York University
Law School. "We celebrate redemption in so many situations, but refuse
that latitude in a criminal justice system still biased against the
poor, particularly the African-American poor."
I hope they only due their duties and don't try to trample on anothers.
Williams was African-American. In the early 1970s he co-founded the
Crips youth gang in south central Los Angeles. The gang and its
countless copycat offshoots have been responsible for numberless
crimes.
In 1997, Williams wrote: "So today I apologize to you all - the
children of America and South Africa - who must cope every day with
dangerous street gangs. I no longer participate in the so-called
gangster lifestyle, and I deeply regret that I ever did."
He went on to say that he had written the "Tookie Speaks Out Against
Gang Violence" children's book series in a bid to "end child-on-child
brutality and black-on-black brutality."
I hope his reversal on this issue is considered by whatever supreme-being is out
there to preform a judgment of all mens souls.
But his efforts are only icing on the cake and not the hinge factor in this case.
Nobody can say how much impact these publications had. Schwarzenegger
was dismissive: "The continued pervasiveness of gang violence leads one
to question the efficacy of Williams' message," the decision reads.
That's a risible argument, like saying the continued pervasiveness of
teenage pregnancies shows that the efforts of those who speak out
against them are useless. Williams had some effect on a huge social
problem; it's fair to believe that if his life had not ended at 51 he
would have had more.
It sounds perfectly reasonable when countering the cries that escalate his role
in ending gang related violence. I think the laughter from a humorous argument
doesn't fall on Arnies shoulders. From my reading so far, I think I have a clue
who deserves to be laughed at.
Williams was also a black man sent in the end to his death by a white
man. Like a lot of black kids, he had it tough, and in his youth he did
heinous things. Social hardship is no excuse for murder, but there is
no escaping the fact that justice is a racial issue in the United
States.
As Stevenson, who is African-American, put it: "Most people of color
believe they are presumed guilty."
To presume it is a racial assumes that African-Americans should be treated
differently. It is just another attempt to mis-interpreted statistics by
mis-interpreting them in another way. Does the fact that the majority of crimes
comes African-Americans mean the African-American is eviler than the white or
that the white is unjust and willingly tramples the others rights. My answer is
neither.
That view has a history: slavery, lynchings, police misconduct, justice
denied. By various means, white America has tried to redeem itself from
that terrible past. It has wanted to believe, unlike Schwarzenegger,
that redemption is possible.
I feel no need for redemption from my ancestors deeds. I did not, nor would I
not, participate in those activities such as lynching. Why am I assumed guilty
of what my fathers fathers father may or may not have done.
But if I had committed a murder, redemption would sound just as hallow.
[snip]
--
Liquid
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: The Cap Punishment of Tookie Williams Isn't Unfair |
18 Dec 2005 10:05:32 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 00:06:38 GMT, Fluidly Unsure
<dripping@mailinator.com> wrote:
Any death sentence carried out is deeply troubling.
Can you give us your reasons, in summary form.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fluidly Unsure" |
|
| Title: Re: The Cap Punishment of Tookie Williams Isn't Unfair |
18 Dec 2005 02:56:19 PM |
|
|
Bob wrote:
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 00:06:38 GMT, Fluidly Unsure
<dripping@mailinator.com> wrote:
Any death sentence carried out is deeply troubling.
Can you give us your reasons, in summary form.
Simply the loss of a life. While this may or may not be a case where it is
warranted, it is a loss none the less. Death may be a natural procession in this
world, but it still hurts. Especially if you are a family member, friend, or
involved with the death.
In this kind of situation we did have a hand in his death and should recognize
that this was a drastic turn of events that called for drastic actions.
On the most basic level and ignoring any political meaning, I see it as more of
a loss since I don't believe in an existence afterwards. But I don't see it as
an evil that should always be avoided since I see death and destruction as a
necessary part of life and creation.
--
Liquid
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: The Cap Punishment of Tookie Williams Isn't Unfair |
18 Dec 2005 07:43:38 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 20:56:19 GMT, Fluidly Unsure
<dripping@mailinator.com> wrote:
Any death sentence carried out is deeply troubling.
Can you give us your reasons, in summary form.
Simply the loss of a life. While this may or may not be a case where it is
warranted, it is a loss none the less. Death may be a natural procession in this
world, but it still hurts.
It does not have to.
Especially if you are a family member, friend, or involved with the death.
Strawman.
On the most basic level and ignoring any political meaning, I see it as more of
a loss since I don't believe in an existence afterwards.
Neither do I.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|