|
The Indiana Information Center on the Abolition of Capital Punishment (IICACP) exists to expose the injustice associated with the application of the death penalty in Indiana. IICACP is open to anyone who is opposed to the death penalty.
|
|||
|
Back Issues
INDIANA ABOLITIONIST Quarterly Newsletter of the Indiana Information Center on the Abolition of Capital Punishment WINTER 2008 IICACP Annual General Meeting Report by Margaret Steiner, IICACP board member The 2007 annual general meeting of IICACP was held at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis and featured poignant testimonies from capital defense attorneys, a retired corrections officer, a former inmante who had been convicted of murder, and a woman whose daughter had been murdered and whose son had been executed for committing murder. This last, Celia McWee, was the keynote speaker. The meeting began with a panel discussion on prison life. Steve Schutte, a public defender who specializes in capital cases and IICACP board member, began by speaking of the unsettling, metallic clangs made by the doors that lead, ever deeper, into death row. Schutte knows that, unlike his clients, he can go home to his loved ones at night. Once behind those virtually impenetrable doors, inmates are told, "every day, and in every way," that they are "cancer[s] that must be eliminated." Yet Schutte has witnessed, time and again, prisoners transcending that message and affirming their humanity. He recounts how prisoners came together to care for a colleague suffering from dementia. "Mr. Moore," they would say, "That's your sock; it goes on your foot." The man overseeing Mr. Moore's care was, however, executed. Likewise, an inmate expressed a desire to exchange his life for that of a friend. If, Schutte concluded, we are opposed to the death penalty because of the innate value of human life, we are part of a much larger struggle, which is up to us to lead. Ceila McWee, who was our keynote speaker later in the afternoon, reaffirmed the jarring nature of the clangs made by the prison doors. Even worse, McWee said, was seeing and hearing the shackles binding her son so tightly that he could not take normal steps as he entered the visiting area. Little by little, McWee reminded us, prisoners on death row, and those facing very long sentences, face the prospect of loved ones forgetting about them: many relatives cannot afford to make the long trips to visit their loved ones in prison, children grow up without a parent or relative Given the very bleak nature of life on death row, McWee voiced a painful dilemma about life without parole. Her son Jerry did not want to face life without parole because he felt he had nothing to look forward to. When he asked his anguished mother whether he should choose to be executed or life without parole, she did not know what to say. She did, however, pledge her full support in whatever decision he made. Kevin Prince, who served 16 years at the state prison in Michigan City for a murder that he did indeed commit, told us how he transcended the drab and restrictive prison existence by completing an undergraduate degree while behind bars and helping fellow inmates to become literate, acquire computer skills, and obtain their GEDs. These were no easy tasks since there were frequent lock-downs, and professors still expected students to complete their work by stipulated deadlines. Price's faith, found in prison, was crucial to his transformation, and he remains convinced that self-improvement and transcendence are possible for prisoners. Martin Hayes, a retired corrections officer at the Indiana State Prison at Michigan City, did not address prison life directly, but stated three reasons for his strong opposition to the death penalty: the first is that capital punishment is morally wrong. The second is the racial disparities in the imposition of the death penalty, and the third is that the death penalty runs counter to the law of "universal love," which does not seek vengeance. Hayes lamented that, in contrast to other countries that he had visited, the United States is governed by "the fear factor," which is behind our harsh and punitive prison policies. After the formal presentations, panelists and audience members continued the discussion of how prisoners and their families are systematically dehumanized, and Steve Schutte reminded us that we, as citizens, are directly responsible for prison policy: we tend to elect legislators who pledge to be "tough on crime," and who then create policies that are punitive rather than restorative. We must find ways of making alternatives to the death penalty more humane, including life without parole. The afternoon session was devoted to the heart-wrenching keynote speech of Celia McWee, who lost a daughter to murder and whose son was executed for an unrelated murder. McWee's nightmare began on New Year's Day, 1980, when she received a phone call that her daughter was dead, and that her daughter's husband had caused the death. From the very beginning, the case of the murder of Celia McWee's daughter Joyce was a travesty. Possibly because it was a case of domestic abuse, the prosecutor was inclined to be lenient in the extreme. After months of silence and constant stone-walling by the prosecutor, Celia McWee obtained documentation of the plea agreement: the son-in-law would plead guilty and abide by whatever punishment the judge would impose. The defendant was given a year of probation, with the proviso that he visit a psychiatrist once a month. He was further granted full custody of his two little girls, then aged 2 and 4. The murder of Celia McWee's daughter was just the beginning of the family's tragic saga, however. Her son Jerry, who had been a police officer, a firefighter, and an emergency medical technician, fell on extremely hard times after a back injury and befriended a young man with a long criminal record. Rather than ask his parents for financial help, Jerry and his companion robbed a convenience store, which resulted in the fatal shooting of a store clerk. A few days later, Jerry's companion shot a roofing contractor with whom the two young men had recently obtained employment. When the crime was discovered, the prosecutor struck a deal with Jerry's companion in which the companion would receive a life sentence, which effectively meant 30 years in jail, in exchange for his testimony against Jerry. The jury, according to Celia McWee's account, was given incomplete or misleading instructions by the judge, as a result of which Jerry received a death sentence. McWee's life was very predictable during the time that Jerry was on Death Row. On Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, Celia didn't dare leave the house for fear that she would miss her son's phone calls. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, she would go about her business. On Saturdays, she would go to the beauty shop and make preparations for the anxiously anticipated visits to her son on Sundays. She would drive three hours, each way, to the prison, without stopping to eat, so that she would not miss the two hours that were allotted for visits. These were "no-contact" visits, but, on occasion, a kindly corrections officer would allow her to hand her son food items through a small crack in the partition that separated them. On these occasions, Jerry would hold his mother's hand and say, "I love you." Sometimes, however, prison staff were less than accommodating, as in the case of one visit when McWee was denied admission to the visiting room because her button-down skirt was deemed inappropriate. The family received much support during their long ordeal. South Carolina's abolitionist community that included Bruce and Julie Pearson, were always there for the family, as well as the management of a jewelry company that employed Celia McWee. In addition, the visits of a Catholic bishop were of great comfort to Jerry. March 19, 2004, will be forever etched in Celia McWee's memory. Jerry called his mother to inform her that a fellow inmate had been taken away to await execution, but that he would call again if his friend received a stay. The succeeding phone call, however, told Celia McWee that Jerry had been given his execution date. As the date of the execution drew near, Jerry decided that he would not prolong his own, and his family's anguish, and he would even help the process by making sure that his veins stood out for the insertion of the IV needles. He also tried to assure his family that his death by lethal injection would not be painful. Celia McWee was the only witness to her son's execution, and she vowed that he would not die alone, unloved, and unmourned. Despite the tremendous adversity faced by Celia McWee, one could detect no bitterness, and her gentle, nonviolent presence was an inspiration to us all. Sandwiched between the meaty and poignant sessions was the mid-day business meeting, which was largely celebratory: we noted that New Jersey was on the verge of abolishing the death penalty; that New York had effectively done so; that the American Bar Association had recommended moratorium in Indiana; and that the U.S. Suppreme Court had imposed a de facto national moratorium while the constitutionality of the death penalty was decided. Bonnie Johnson initiated a program whereby abolitionists could buy holiday gifts for the children of Death Row prisoners and send those gifts in the prisoners’ names. Finally, board elections were held. All four officers were re-elected: Chris Hitz-Bradley, President; Alice Fitzgerald, Vice-President; Nick Hess, Secretary; Julia Pearson, Treasurer. Elected as members of the board were Marge Steiner, Kevin Prince, Michael Gradison and Debby Peddie. Meeting participants expressed the view that sentiments for abolition are growing ever stronger nation-wide, and we may yet see abolition become a reality, even in the state of Indiana. A MODERN HORROR STORY Recently, I’ve been haunted by an image from childhood. As a child, I loved horror stories and movies. One image was particularly frightening. In a film set in Victorian times, a young man falls into a coma in which he is aware of his surroundings but cannot respond or communicate. The film is from his perspective, including his internal thoughts. Medical knowledge being what it was, he is pronounced dead. His family proceeds with his funeral and the young man can hear his own eulogy. Because the upper half of the top of his coffin is glass--common in the Victorian era—he can also see what is going on. He struggles to do something, move, make a noise, anything to indicate he is alive. But his coma stops him. The man watches with growing terror as he is carried to the graveyard, lowered into the grave and the gravediggers beginning burying him. He sees the first shovelfuls of dirt landing on the glass in front of his face and silently screams for the gravediggers to stop. They do not. Everything slowly grows black as the dirt covers the glass. Eventually, there is no sound except the man’s own agonized thoughts as he slowly suffocates. This is chillingly like what happens with a botched lethal injection. The first drug, the sedative, doesn’t work but the second drug, the paralytic, does. The man is conscious but unable to move or communicate. He feels like he’s suffocating and tries to do something to let his executioners know. But he cannot. He cannot respond when the third drug begins burning its way through his veins. Like the Victorian man does to the gravediggers, the man silently screams for his executioners to stop. They do not. Paralyzed and helpless, soon added to the searing pain in his veins is the hammerstroke of a heart attack. Finally, the man slowly dies. On January 7, 2008, the US Supreme Court heard arguments on a challenge to Kentucky’s use of lethal injection. The argument is whether this means of execution is too painful to be constitutional. Killing a human being is a messy business and inevitably involves some pain. As Justice Scalia sarcastically noted, it’s an execution not surgery. But, is a method veterinary associations ban as too cruel for putting down rabid dogs really the best we can do? Regardless of one’s position on the death penalty, don’t our fellow citizens deserve better? There is an element within the abolitionist movement that believes we should let things get as bad as possible; we should not try to “improve” the death penalty in any way because doing so makes it easier to kill. There is some logic in this absolutist position. But ask a man on death row or someone who has witnessed an execution and they will say they want the execution to be as painless as possible. No one wants to die painfully or see someone they care about die painfully. There is a real flesh and blood cost behind the debate over dosages and procedures and constitutionality. A cost that our fellow citizens, our fellow human beings, have paid for over 20 years. Surely, we can do better.
LAST WISH TRUST FUND When a death row prisoner petitions the governor for clemency, his attorneys rarely get paid for their work or reimbursed for their out of pocket expenses on the clemency campaign. The families of all death row prisoners—those lucky enough to still have contact with their family—are poor. When the state kills a man, it is a heavy burden for his family to pay for his funeral expenses. These financial burdens add to the terrible psychological trauma of trying to stop the execution and, if that attempt is unsuccessful, of burying a loved one. Having seen this situation too often, several years ago, Jodie English, a capital defense attorney and long-time IICACP member, started the Last Wish Trust Fund. The Fund provides financial assistance to the families of men the state has executed and helps defray some of the expenses of his clemency campaign. The Fund has provided assistance to the families and attorneys of several men who have died. Jerry Thompson was murdered while on Indiana’s death row and had no family able to pay for his funeral. If there are no arrangements for a death row prisoner’s funeral, the Prison cremates him and buries his remains in the Prison cemetery. Thompson had told his attorneys of his great fear of being cremated so his attorneys paid for the funeral themselves. The Fund was able to contribute to the cost. When the state killed David Woods in 2007, his family struggled to provide the funeral he had requested. Deacon Mal Lunsford, a friend of David’s, collected donations for David’s funeral, including a substantial contribution from Catholic Charities. The Fund was also able to contribute to help David’s family honor his last wish. These are difficult financial times and there are many worthy causes vying for our contributions. Helping with the funeral expenses of a man the state has killed is probably not at the top of anyone’s list of favorite charities. But these men and their attorneys, who put aside their law practice to work for weeks with no pay, deserve our support. When the state kills in our name, we at least owe the man a decent burial. The Last Wish Trust Fund is a non-profit organization so all contributions are tax-deductible. Every dollar counts; please send what you can. The address is: 8061 SR 47 S, Crawfordsville, Indiana, 47933-8211. Make checks payable to “The Last Wish Trust Fund.” SUPREME COURT
CONSIDERS EXPANSION OF DEATH PENALTY On January 4, 2007, the US Supreme Court accepted a case from Louisiana in which the defendant was sentenced to death for raping a child that did not include death. Louisiana has 2 men on its death row who were sentenced to death for raping a child. Louisiana is one of 5 states which impose death for a crime that does not include a killing but is the only state that has actively tried to execute anyone for a crime less than a murder. The other 4 states are Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. There has not been an execution in the United States for rape or any crime that did not include the death of the victim since 1964. The US Supreme Court banned execution for the rape of an adult woman in 1977. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case, Kennedy v. Louisiana, in April. The death penalty is in retreat everywhere, with courts and legislatures limiting its scope and application. However, if the Supreme Court upholds Kennedy’s sentence, it will constitute the greatest expansion of the death penalty since the Court reinstated the death penalty in the 1970’s. SUPREME COURT IMPOSES NATIONAL MORATORIUM On September 25, 2008, the US Supreme Court agreed to decide Baze v. Kentucky, a case that will determine if the current lethal injection process constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. In the wake of the Court’s action, several state and lower federal courts stayed executions pending the Court’s decision in Baze. However, several courts in several states denied stays. This forced the Supreme Court to issue stays in those cases, effectively imposing nation-wide moratorium on executions. The Court is expected to issue its opinion before the end of its term in June. That will mean at least 9 months without an execution anywhere in the country. No significant increase in the murder rate during those 9 months—as is sure to be the case—will be an eloquent retort to the recent disingenuous academic analyses purporting to show that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder. IICACP’S SORT-OF-ANNUAL STRATEGIC PLANNING AND TRAINING RETREAT On Saturday, January 26, 2008, IICACP will hold its second retreat to learn organizing skills and plan our direction for the next year. Any interested abolitionist is welcome to come, learn new skills, help plot the downfall of the death penalty in Indiana and socialize with other abolitionists. This year’s retreat will start midmorning in the Unitarian-Universalist Church of Bloomington and will probably include a pitch-in. Although there is no charge for registration, we ask that you please let us know you’re coming by sending and e-mail to info@iicacp.org or exparrot@sbcglobal.net or by calling the IICACP voicemail at voicemail: 317-466-712. The retreat will start mid-morning. For those of you traveling a long distance, several BCADP members have graciously offered to put people up for both Friday and Saturday night. CELEBRATE LIFE & ABOLITION Celebrate Life is an annual event to mark the date when Michigan became the first English-speaking jurisdiction to abolish the death penalty. Sponsored by Amnesty International, the Indpls. Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, IICACP and others, this year’s Celebrate Life will be at 4:30 pm on February 27, 2008 in the Statehouse Rotunda. Amnesty International will present its Indiana Abolitionist of the Year award. NEW JERSEY ABOLISHES DEATH PENALTY On December 17, 2007, New Jersey Governor Jon S. Corzine signed legislation abolishing the death penalty, making New Jersey the first state to abolish the death penalty since the United States Supreme Court lifted its moratorium in the 1970’s. Abolition was the culmination of years of efforts by local groups such as New Jerseyans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, the New Jersey ACLU and the New Jersey Catholic Conference, as well as national groups such as the National Coalition for the Abolition of the Death Penalty and our friends at Equal Justice USA, particularly Shari Silberstein. Governor Corzine’s signing statement sounded like an abolitionist call to action. Governor Corzine’s remarks are presented in their entirety below. Thank you all for being here. Today, December 17th 2007, is a momentous day - a day of progress - for the State of New Jersey and for the millions of people across our nation and around the globe who reject the death penalty as a moral or practical response to the grievous, even heinous, crime of murder. Today, through my signature on this bill, New Jersey abolishes the death penalty as a policy of our state. First let me cite the Death Penalty Study Commission, chaired by Reverend Bill Howard, pastor of Bethany Baptist Church in Newark, a group that was made up of a diverse set of individuals representative of prosecutors, law-enforcement, victims, religious groups and others. The state legislature showed courageous leadership. I must say, incredible leadership not just by Senator Lesniak and Senator Martin, the sponsors or Assemblyman Caraballo, or Assemblyman Bateman, the leaders Roberts & Codey – but for all those that voted yes. This is one of those conscience votes that individuals must actually weigh and balance their own sense of morality and I am very, very grateful to all of you. A number of you are here today who voted yes, Senator Gil, Senator Turner. I look forward to joining with all of you as I sign this bill. It should be noted that because of the action of the legislature, this is the first state to legislatively end the death penalty since the U.S. Supreme Court reauthorized capital punishment in 1976. I also want to thank advocacy groups, particularly New Jerseyans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, which have created a fundamental grass roots groundswell that put pressure on those of us in public service to stand up and do the right thing. The New Jersey Catholic Conference, the ACLU and there are many other groups that joined in this process and I am eternally grateful. I also want to recognize that other good people will describe today's actions in quite different terms - in terms of injustice – particularly for those who carry heavy hearts, broken hearts from their tragic losses. While no one can imagine their pain, I will sign this law abolishing the death penalty because I and a bipartisan majority of our legislature - and I congratulate Senator Bateman and Senator Martin in particular for their leadership on this - believe a nonviolent sentence of life in prison without parole best captures our State's highest values and reflects our best efforts to search for true justice, rather than state-endorsed killing. As Reverend King implored all mankind while accepting his Nobel Peace Prize - "Man must evolve, for all human conflict, a method of resolution which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation." Today, New Jersey is truly evolving. We evolve, if you believe as I do, that government cannot provide a foolproof death penalty that precludes the possibility of executing the innocent. Society must ask - Is it not morally superior to imprison 100 people for life than it is to execute all 100 when it is probable we execute an innocent? We evolve, if you believe as I do, that because New Jersey has not executed anyone in 44 years, there is little collective will or appetite for our community to enforce this law and therefore the law has little deterrence value. That is, if you ever accepted there was a deterrent value. We evolve, if you believe as I do, that the loved ones of victims may be more deeply hurt by long delays and endless appeals than they would be if there were certainty of life in prison with no possibility of parole. Our debate has brought forth victims' voices on both sides of this perspective. We evolve, if you believe as I do, it is economic folly to expend more State resources on legal processes in an attempt to execute an inmate than keeping a criminal incarcerated for life. It is estimated that it cost the State of New Jersey more than a quarter-billion dollars, above and beyond incarceration, to pursue the death penalty since it was reinstated in 1982 – a significant sum that could have effectively be used in supporting and compensating victims' families. Finally, we evolve, if you believe as I do, that it is difficult, if not impossible, to devise a humane technique of execution - one that is not cruel and unusual. These are all thoughtful and logical arguments, and there are others, to abolish the death penalty - the Commission and the legislature gave weight to these arguments - but for me, the question is more fundamental. I believe society must first determine if its endorsement of violence begets violence - and - if violence undermines our commitment to the sanctity of life. To these questions, I answer "Yes," and therefore I believe we must evolve to ending that endorsement. Now, make no mistake: by this action, society is not forgiving these heinous crimes or acts that have caused immeasurable pain to the families and brought fear to society. The perpetrators of these actions deserve absolutely no sympathy and the criminals deserve the strictest punishment that can be imposed without imposing death. That punishment is life in prison without parole. The only exception, of course, is the determination that a convicted felon is in fact innocent beyond the shadow of a doubt. Let me repeat: this bill does not forgive or in any way condone the unfathomable acts carried out by the eight men now on New Jersey's death row. They will spend the rest of their lives in jail. And to that end, last night, I signed an order commuting to life without parole the death sentences of the eight persons currently on death row. This commutation action provides legal certainty that these individuals will never again walk free in our society. These commutations, along with today's bill signing, brings to a close in New Jersey the protracted moral and practical debate on the death penalty. Our collective decision is one for which we can be proud. Thank you. |
||