The state can't be trusted to take a life
A possibly innocent man is at risk of execution in Oklahoma, and an unfairly maligned celebrity is trying to save him.
Whenever the subject of the death penalty comes up, I often hear people saying capital punishment should only be used in cases where we absolutely, positively, know the condemned person is definitely guilty.
The problem is, if you’re convicted of murder, by definition it’s because the jury absolutely positively knew you were definitely guilty. That’s what “beyond a reasonable doubt” means.
I’m actually not against the death penalty in principle. There are crimes so depraved and sadistic that no other punishment is appropriate. John Wayne Gacy and Timothy McVeigh deserved to die. Clifford Olson would have deserved death, if Canada still capital punishment when he carried out some of the most horrifying crimes in the nation’s history.
It’s just that I have no faith in a justice system made up of fallible human beings to ensure that only those who truly the ultimate punishment actually get it. At best, investigators and lawyers and judges and juries can make mistakes. At worst, as in the case of two people just exonerated for their alleged involvement in the killing of Malcolm X, officials can be downright malicious:
Two men convicted of the 1965 assassination of Malcolm X are to be exonerated after more than half a century, according to their lawyers.
A 22-month investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance's Office and lawyers for the men -- Muhammad A. Aziz and the late Khalil Islam -- found that evidence of their innocence, including FBI documents, was withheld at trial.
At least they were ultimately released, after years of doing time for a crime they didn’t commit. In Oklahoma, however, the Governor has less than 24 hours to save the life of a man who might be innocent:
With the execution of Julius Jones just one day away, his fate lies in the hands of Oklahoma's Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt to grant clemency to the death row inmate who says he is innocent.
Jones is scheduled to be executed at 4 p.m. CT, according to Josh Ward, spokesman for the state Department of Corrections. The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 3-1 November 1 to recommend granting clemency to Jones on November 1. The same board also recommended commuting his sentence in September.
Stitt has not said whether he will accept it.
Jones' supporters have gathered near the governor's mansion in Oklahoma City over the past few nights, and some even set up tents outside overnight, CNN affiliate KOCO reported.
At a news conference Wednesday evening, Jones' mother, Madeline Davis-Jones, described her son's scheduled execution as a lynching.
"If you think Julius is guilty, give him a fair trial. Do it over again, do it right!" Davis-Jones said as the crowd erupted in applause. "If my child is executed tomorrow or any day, it should be without a doubt. Not even a little bit of doubt."
Cece Jones-Davis, director for the Justice for Julius campaign, said it was cruel for Stitt to put the family through this waiting period. She said Stitt's office yesterday told community pastors he was taking the decision seriously and was "in deep prayer."
"This governor has nothing to pray about, he has a decision to make," Jones-Davis said. "Governor, you still have a chance, you still have time. You have time Gov. Stitt to get this right."
Is Jones innocent? I don’t know. (The victim’s family, for one, remains unconvinced of his innocence.) But if the state is going to take his life, there shouldn’t be any doubt. Period. If he is ultimately exonerated there is no coming back.
With the Rittenhouse trial in the news, I’ve seen many conservatives signalling their support for fair trials, the presumption of innocence, and a justice system that doesn’t punish those who don’t deserve it. As a criminal defence lawyer, I am very happy to see it.
Now let’s see if that applies to any other cases, or just the one that happens to push all the right buttons, politically. It’s curious, how many people who claim to support “limited government” are okay with the state imposing an irrevocable penalty.
By the way, who has been most responsible for bringing attention to Julius Jones’ case? This woman.
Kim K. is often treated like a punchline, but for several years she’s been using her prominent position to fight for criminal justice reform. I wish we had more tabloid celebrities like that.
I don't believe in the death penalty either, but not for the same reason often cited by many. True, human beings, and therefore the justice system we created, are indeed fallible. And the prospect of just on person not guilty of a capital offense being executed for it should be cause enough to abolish the death penalty once and for all. But my real objection is that I don't see death as the ultimate punishment for a crime, no matter how heinous the crime may be.
Drop the trap, pull the trigger, flip the switch or press the plunger, and the punishment is over. The harsher punishment to me is the permanent deprivation of an offender's freedom. And while I don't advocate for "cruel and unusual" punishment, that deprivation should involve the offender doing the hardest of hard time, up to the line delineating cruel and unusual.
This remedy also leaves open the possibility of remediation in the event that the conviction resulting in this punishment was made in error, a possibility that will always exist as long as we live in an imperfect world filled with imperfect people.