I confess I'm deeply conflicted about the death penalty. Several years ago I sat through an excruciating week of jury selection in a capital murder case here in Palm Beach County. I made it to the final cut, but was finally dismissed after I told the state attorney under questioning that I personally couldn't vote to give someone the death penalty. The defendant in that case (who was a silent presence that week) was ultimately convicted and sentenced to life without parole. Most likely he avoided death row because he had the services of one of the top defense lawyers in town, whose skills I was able to witness first hand -- something most defendants in death penalty cases do not have.
What surprised me most about that experience was the inability of the vast majority of potential jurors to articulate why they were for or against capital punishment. The ones that did have a clear point of view were often off the wall. I vividly remember one woman of the "fry 'em all" camp who said she didn't believe in giving life without parole because prisoners could watch cable TV, work out and (I kid you not) "have sex". I walked away relieved not to have been picked, and troubled that so many of my fellow citizens seemed not to understand or have thought about what a serious thing it is to take a human life, even if it's justified.
This piece by David Grann is either the story of a man who committed an unspeakable crime and got what he deserved, or it's the story of an innocent man executed a mere 5 years ago. Either way it's an unsettling piece of investigative journalism.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
The case of Cameron Todd Willingham
Labels:
Miscellanea,
News
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
i heard Grann interviewed; disturbing. I am also conflicted...mostly coming to the anti-death pentalty viewpoint. And what a wild experience you had!! Scary.
Post a Comment