My father always said the problem with the death penalty is not that some people don't deserve to die, but that it's rare that you can be certain the jury convicted the right guy. In the case of Tsarnaev, there is little or no doubt--he admitted to his role, although exactly what his role was may never be completely understood.
And yet, I am still disturbed about the death verdict for Tsarnaev.
Thinking about spending the rest of my life in prison, I am pretty sure I'd prefer the quick out, the needle. The thought of having to spend day after day in misery would be too depressing. We used to talk about what disease we'd least like to have and one of my fellow interns said, "Depression, because in every other disease, you have good moments, good days, but there is never a good moment in depression." That is the way I imagine life behind bars. I may be wrong. Maybe even in prison, there are good moments, watching a bird fly by your window, listening to rain drum on the window in a thunderstorm, but these would only, I'm imagining, make the imprisonment worse.
So my problem with the death penalty is not that it is inhumane--in fact a lethal injection may be more humane than 60 years behind bars. It is not the experience of the man most affected which concerns me, actually. It is the idea that in killing him we do something to ourselves. We are, in essence, saying we are no better, no different than he is.
Okay, you wanted to kill us. You lost. Now we kill you. It's war.
In a way, we elevate his murderous intent to respectability. This is war. In war we kill each other.
But, if we send him away to jail we say, "No, we are better than you. You expected we would kill you, but we will not do what you did. We want you to think about what you did."
Somehow, I'm not sure I feel that way about those two miscreants who murdered the Kutter family, about whom Truman Capote wrote In Cold Blood, which is, I know, inconsistent and irrational. But those two guys were, pretty clearly, psychopaths. They considered themselves the victims, had no capacity for reflection, sympathy, and in fact were more like rabid dogs, simply had to be put down.
Not that it's possible for me to ever really know what they are like. I'm just relating them to people I met on psych wards. But Tsarnaev, from what little you can tell from reading about him, is a recognizable mucked up 19 year old, a type I think I knew from years of talking with boys on wrestling teams, kids who could go in different directions, some of whom wound up in Congress, some in jail.
I'm just thinking out loud here. Maybe I'm totally wrong. I need help here.
Phantom,
ReplyDeleteMy primary opposition to the death penalty is the same as your father's-that we are not always right in ascertaining guilt and even if we were to get it right 999 times out of 1,000-the lone one we got wrong is enough to negate the whole argument for the death penalty. From there my thoughts on the matter are remarkably similar to yours- on the one hand I believe, like you, that it is important that we as a society behave in a way that is moral and civilized-that we send a message to the world, but more importantly to ourselves, that we, as a whole, are above the actions of the cruelest, basest individuals in our midst. However, I can also think of instances so heinous and despicable that my opposition to the death penalty seemingly evaporates. You point out the killers from In Cold Blood-my mind goes to the killers of the doctor's family in CT a few years back. As you may recall, they first brought the wife to the bank to withdraw money and then, rather than leaving with the cash- instead raped the wife and her two teen daughters, then tied them to their beds and lit the beds and the house on fire-while the three victims were still alive. Such pure cruelty and evil initially had me thinking that a just punishment would include a public square, a bed and a match. I did move beyond that barbaric thought-but never totally beyond the notion that killing them would be justified and in some perverse way preferable...like it's imperative we rid the earth swiftly of such scum..I don't really want society to embrace state sanctioned and administered death-it's just that I can understand the desire to kill the worst of the worst because I've had it too.
As for Tsarnaev, I feel the same as you, which puts us clearly in the minority. I see, at least the possibility, that he was so young and ideologically and politically warped that he did not totally grasp the dire consequences of his actions. Is he remorseful now-how do we know..Everyone, including the prosecution and the jurors, point to his giving the finger to the surveillance camera in his cell as proof he is not remorseful. That could mean that, or it could just be a sign that he is depressed and frustrated and that is how a 19 year old male demonstrates those emotions..His age and lack of life experience does seem relevant to me-he was at the time not even old enough to legally drink...The aforementioned criminals are well beyond rehabilitation-Tsarnaev does seem like he could perhaps be rehabilitated-not that that should also mean paroled.... Then there is the practical side of it-the years of appeal, the possibility of spurring more terrorist attacks with Tsarnaev portrayed as the heroic martyr. Then there are the enormous legal costs-as my son said, better to build a hospital with the funds we expend on appeals...I can think of any number of ways the money would be better spent...
Maud
Maud,
ReplyDeleteThe Petit family, two daughters 18 and 11 and the wife were raped, set afire in Cheshire Connecticut, 2007, just as you describe. Horrific does not begin to describe. A distinct echo of In Cold blood, home invasion, murder etc.
Arguments at the penalty phase that life in prison would be a living hell and more of a torture than lethal injection. I can see your point, but still not sure how I'd vote.
Phantom