Reviving the blog with happier content

I think my mistake when I started this was only blogging on serious stuff, thinking that that was the best way to make sure this was a focused blog...but, it also made blogging a bit of a chore, since I am not always in the mood to record my deep thoughts on dark subjects. So, here is an e.e. cummings Christmas poem to accompany my new resolution to blog on a wider range of subjects!

LITTLE tree
little silent Christmas tree
you are so little
you are more like a flower
who found you in the green forest
and were you very sorry to come away?
see i will comfort you
because you smell so sweetly
i will kiss your cool bark
and hug you safe and tight
just as your mother would,
only don't be afraid
look the spangles
that sleep all the year in a dark box
dreaming of being taken out and allowed to shine,
the balls the chains red and gold the fluffy threads,
put up your little arms
and i'll give them all to you to hold
every finger shall have its ring
and there won't be a single place dark or unhappy
then when you're quite dressed
you'll stand in the window for everyone to see
and how they'll stare!
oh but you'll be very proud
and my little sister and i will take hands
and looking up at our beautiful tree
we'll dance and sing
"Noel Noel"

The Death Penalty and Mental Illness

NAMI has just released a report in which family members of murder victims and familes of those with mental illness come together to denounce the use of capital punishment on mentally handicapped offenders:

The argument for exempting persons with severe mental
illness from the death penalty is that the death penalty –
the harshest of punishments – does not deter, serves no retributive
function for, and is a disproportionate punishment
for individuals who are less culpable for their crime than the
average person.

This reminds me of an anecdote told to me by a prison chaplain about a prisoner who had requested pie for his final meal, but left it uneaten in his cell, because he thought he would be coming back to finish it later. If the person lacks even the understanding to know, after years of preparation, that what is about to happen to them is final, how could they possibly be expected to realize prior to committing a crime that they might be executed for it?

At this point sometimes unfortunate arguments begin to appear about how "putting down" people who lack moral understanding is good for society whether they understand what's happening or not--but it is ridiculous to pretend that we lack the ability to keep these people under adequate medical care to prevent them from committing further crimes, and once you begin justifying killing people just because they are inconvenient, you've started down a slippery slope indeed.

The report is a great read, finally listing among its conclusions that:

Everything possible should be done to reform and improve
the mental health system so that individuals with severe
mental illnesses can receive affordable and appropriate treatment
they need, thus preventing, or at least minimizing to a
far greater degree than we now do, the risk of violence committed
by some individuals who experience acute psychotic
symptoms of mental illness.

Obama Refusing to Release Abu Ghraib Sexual Abuse Photos

From the Telegraph:

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube...

The graphic nature of some of the images may explain the US President’s attempts to block the release of an estimated 2,000 photographs from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan despite an earlier promise to allow them to be published.

Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.

“I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan.

“The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it.”

One thing that I have learned in the course of doing my death penalty research is that in American culture, "if there aren't pictures, the violence isn't real." This is why crime scene photographs are fetishized while executions are untelevised, why Bush wanted to keep images of soldiers' coffins returning home off the airwaves, and why Americans often seem more emotionally affected by violent scenes in movies or on TV than they are by what's happening in Rwanda or Darfur. (It's not that no pictures are available, of course, but it requires special effort to find them...effort most will not go to.)

That's why I'm greatly disturbed by Obama's choice to give the public absolutely no access to photographs of Iraqi prisoners being sexually abused by American soldiers. There is obviously some concern that those in the pictures not be further victimized by having these photographs used casually or without respect for the great emotional and physical pain which is captured in each one. Any decision by individuals to publish them would have to be given a lot of careful thought and consideration. Yet to give the public no access at all to the photographs ensures that for many Americans the violence done here in their names will never seem quite "real" to them. And Obama and General Taguba do not justify the decision with any reference to those being abused--instead they say that releasing them would "put our troops in greater danger." This is not a question of respect for the victims but fear of reprisals.

Abu Ghraib is already a story associated with photographs, and we have already seen horrific scenes from the prison splashed across magazine covers and television screens. Why release further photos? Because sexual abuse does cross a further line in both our culture and most world cultures--thanks to our understanding of sexuality as being an essential part of the self, it goes beyond mere abuse of the body or mind and attacks a person's core sense of being. Recognizing the full horror of what occurred in Abu Ghraib is painful but necessary for Americans to understand how fully they, a supposedly Christian nation, have denied the humanity of Iraqis, whom they believed to have been created in God's own image. We cannot hope to atone for our sins until we have seen them in their full horror, and accepted our own culpability.

Good(ish) News from Japan

From Death Penalty News:

Japan reintroduced popular juries in penal trials after a break of 66 years. This aligned Japan with the other G8 countries and created an opportunity for debate on capital punishment...

According to a poll by the Yomiuri newspaper, despite more than 80% of the population favouring the death penalty, 79% said they did not want to take part in popular juries ‘so as not to have to decide on giving the death penalty.’

The jury can play a really key part in death penalty cases exactly because of the attitudes brought to light by the poll--even if you support capital punishment in principle, actually feeling responsible for it being carried out can make people question the workings of the system they're a part of...That's why there are so many ex-prison officials and judges who now oppose the death penalty.

I think this could also draw more attention to the death penalty in Japan, which depends on a veil of secrecy to an even greater extent than it does in the United States--the condemned is only told on the morning of their execution that it's about to happen, and their family and loved ones aren't told until after the person is already dead. It's hard to even begin to imagine the psychological torture inherent in that, not only for the condemned person but also for everyone who cares about him or her...

Sotomeyer and Capital Punishment?

Still trying to figure out what Sotomeyer's stance is on capital punishment, but this is a good overview of her career from SCOTUSBlog...

Global Day of Action for Troy Davis

Amnesty International has declared today to be a Global Day of Action on behalf of Troy Davis, a death row inmate in Georgia who may be executed soon despite the abundant evidence that his trial and conviction were unfair.

7 out of 9 of those who testified against Davis have now recanted their testimony, and one of those who has not recanted is a suspect in the crime himself. There is NO physical evidence linking Davis to the crime scene.

What I find baffling about the persistence of Georgia in trying to kill Troy Davis is that this is a case when pro-death penalty forces could easily deflect attention from the many less clear-cut but still shady OTHER cases on death row by making a big point of giving Davis his day in court. Then people would say, "Oh, see, if an innocent man is somehow convicted, he'll get his chance to prove it before execution--the system works," and the death penalty system itself could keep on rolling.

The fact that Troy Davis has not gotten his day in court indicates clearly how invisible the machinery of death really is. Even in a case like Davis's, where there's so much to indicate probable innocence, politicians can still feel safe betting that the public at large will not pay enough attention to make ignoring his pleas for justice a politically unsound move.

We can only hope that the efforts of Amnesty International and other groups fighting on Troy's behalf will somehow raise awareness of the case enough to save his life. Go here to find out how you can get involved.

Forgiveness and Willie McNair

Alabama executed Willie McNair last night. Though countless people wrote to the governor begging him to spare McNair's life, he chose instead only to sign new legislation allowing more of the victim's family members to witness the execution.

Via Death Penalty News, one of these family member's reaction to the execution:

Wayne Riley, the youngest of the sons, issued a statement afterward: "I thank God for keeping myself, my 4 brothers and my sister alive and in good health so that we were able to see justice finally done. I ask that you pray for my family in the coming days and for the Willie McNair family, too, for they ... have suffered for what he has done."

Wayne Riley also said: "I can forgive Willie McNair for what he did because he paid the price with his life."

"I can forgive Willie McNair...because he paid the price with his life." Riley's statements caught my attention because they capture perfectly the accepted "Christian" pro-death penalty response to executions. A reference to "justice" having been done, a request for prayers for both his family and McNair's (though without acknowledging that the pain to McNair's family has in part been inflicted by the state and all of those who worked together to kill him--Instead the blame is put solely with McNair) and a cheap reference to being able to forgive McNair now that he is dead.

Why do I use the word cheap? Because the Christian ethic of agape calls for loving your enemy without relying on violence. You can't punch someone out and then say you forgive them as they lie bleeding on the floor and truly believe that you have done just what Jesus would have done. Yet with the death penalty system this is exactly what many Christians try to do--with the key difference that the other person will never get up, their life is gone, as is their capacity to live in loving community with other people. They will never experience the redemptive power of your forgiveness and you've really missed out on it too, having never asked yourself to take the spiritually challenging step of forgiving them while they were still able to be in relationship with you.

Being critical of what Riley says will seem out of bounds to some; we often believe that victims should be treated with kid gloves. But living in community means sometimes calling your community members to be accountable for the way they are living and the choices they are making. Riley is within his rights to have decided that he wanted to have the government kill his relative's murderer and to have done everything he could to make that happen. But those actions were not consistent with the Christian ethics of love and forgiveness, and he and everyone else who supports capital punishment should stop pretending that they are.

Herbert, "What Color Is That Baby?"

Bob Herbert writes an op-ed in today's NYT about the race of murder victims and the resulting media coverage. In it he asks why young white female victims receive more attention than children who die in the inner-city:

It’s a searing double-standard that tells us volumes about the ways in which we view one another, and whose lives are considered to have value in this society and whose are not.
Another disturbing aspect of the coverage is the extreme prurient interest that drives it. The press goes wild over stories about murderous attacks on women who are young, attractive and white.

A closer look at how and why the news media covers some of these stories is overdue. I’d like to see more coverage, not less, of murderous violence in the U.S. But I’d like that coverage to be much broader, more meaningful and less sensationalized.

"Less sensationalized" is the key part of this, I think. Herbert is definitely correct that white victims attract more press coverage, in part because white readers think of violence happening to young white women as being outside the norm, while violence directed against blacks or Latinos in Chicago is "expected," especially when the perpetrators are also non-white.

Stories like Johanna Justin-Jinich's allow an eager white middle-class audience to examine a murderer who "lurks within" the accepted in-group, while coverage of gang violence or even the shooting of innocent children in neighborhoods overrun by gangs will never excite the same feeling of horror/dread in these readers. The best horror movies know that you have to make your audience believe the threat they are witnessing destroying other lives could also exist within their own homes and neighborhoods.

In short, Herbert is correct about the media bias, but the problem goes beyond simply which kind of violence gets covered or which lives are seen to have value. Until our society comes to truly believe that violence is unacceptable and NOT NORMAL no matter where it occurs, the media will continue to make more money covering the Craigslist Killer and others like him than the countless dead children Herbert mentions. Racial and ethnic boundaries are still so strong in America that it will take a lot of change for well-off white audiences to start thinking of "their" problems as "our" problems, and until they do, the situation will almost certainly stay as it is.

Corinna Barrett Lain on the "Cost Issue"

From The Christian Science Monitor, law professor Corinna Barrett Lain on the recent shift of the death penalty abolitionist movement to focus on the financial cost of executions:

Money is the new morality.

The turn itself is significant. In the United States, we have now exonerated some 130 people on death row. We have dozens of studies proving racial discrimination in the administration of death, and case after case showing the persistence of woefully inadequate defense counsel. On their own, these issues have not moved us.

Abolishing the death penalty didn't make sense until it made dollars and cents.

In the drive to eliminate capital punishment, I suppose a money argument that works is better than a moral argument that doesn't. But there is a larger cost to monetizing the death penalty debate, a cost to sparing an individual's life simply because it is not worth taking. We have reason enough to make the right call on the death penalty without it.

I agree with Lain that focusing on the financial expenses of the system misses the larger arguments that need to be made, but even her list of other things that should have moved us ignores the moral question at the very heart of the death penalty: is it ever right for the government to intentionally take the life of one of its citizens?

Questions of innocence and racial/economic prejudice are certainly important and effective topics for the abolitionist movement to focus on. Yet they are actually similar to the cost issue in that they suggest that if a list of acknowledged problems were "solved," capital punishment would somehow become acceptable. No matter how effective these arguments may be in the short term, they will fail when the abolitionist movement reaches the states that are clinging to the death penalty most doggedly--the people there firmly believe that their support of capital punishment is in keeping with what God wants for humanity. Speeches about money or lawyers or DNA evidence will sound hollow without equally strong moral arguments to back them up, and the abolitionist movement will ultimately fail unless it adjusts itself accordingly.

Awaiting Sentencing for Steven Dale Green

Iraqis Demand Death Penalty for US Soldier

Green was accused of being the leader of the rape of the 14-year-old Iraqi girl in the town of about 50 000, and of killing her, her father, mother and six-year-old sister...

The leader of Mahmudiyah town council, Najem Mahdi, said only execution could right the terrible wrong committed.

"The crime he committed was premeditated and it was an assault against all Iraqis," he said. "There will only be justice if the most severe punishment is handed down to the soldier."

I'm surprised this case hasn't attracted more attention in the media over the last few days. I suspect the statements by Iraqis, if the jury heard them, would actually make it less likely that Green would receive the death penalty, since Americans are unlikely to take well to "outsiders" calling for the life of an American soldier. While Green's actions are horrific, I wonder whether he is as likely to receive the death penalty as he might be had his victims been white upper-class Americans. Somehow I doubt it.

On the other hand, Green's defense is now trying to draw attention to the fact that Green did not act alone and that the structure and culture of the army itself is partially to blame for what happened. Probably a valid point, but the effectiveness of that strategy will really depend on the composition of the jury--studies of death penalty juries have shown that jurors tend to want to blame individuals rather than systems or environmental factors. Easier to dismiss one person as being inherently depraved than to ask hard questions about the military that "protects" us or what we were really doing in Iraq.

I'm interested to see which way the sentencing goes, since there are so many complex factors intersecting in this case...

Texas Charging Victims for Rape Kits

Via Think Progress:

Texas is charging rape victims who cooperate with police

Another reminder of America's short attention span--there was such an outcry about this practice in Alaska during Sarah Palin's VP run, but now, six months later, the same thing is continuing to happen elsewhere in the country. And this time, without it being tied to a media magnet like Palin, the story is unlikely to receive half as much critical attention...When will we stop treating rape victims like criminals?

"Torture Allegation Probes Run Political Risks"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/10/MN3617F7S3.DTL&feed=rss.news

Public opinion seems to be against conducting investigations into the so-called torture policy. A CNN poll conducted in late April found respondents split almost evenly on whether they approved of the Bush administration's decision to use techniques that 60 percent of respondents called torture.

A slight majority said neither Congress nor an independent panel should investigate who authorized those procedures. An even larger majority opposed investigating the military and intelligence personnel who used those procedures.

Defying that opinion could bring Obama's presidential honeymoon with independent voters to an abrupt end, said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist.

"It isn't that people approve of the torture ... it's just that they can see this turning into another long national nightmare where we flog ourselves in front of the world," he said.

Of course, not pressing for prosecution in order to avoid "another long national nightmare" is, in fact, implicitly approving of the torture. We wouldn't think much of an individual who committed a crime but then asked not to be prosecuted because he or she would find it personally embarrassing to be judged before their peers. The public nature of the process is part of the point.

I think Sabato is right, though, that Americans tend to avoid doing too much thinking about anything that reflects poorly on their country--now that waterboarding is being widely labeled as torture (regardless of what Hannity and others like him may say), Americans are being made uncomfortable. We like to believe that all violence we participate in is ultimately going to be redemptive for us and for our country. The way we talk about World War II demonstrates this clearly--we focus a lot on how we defeated Hitler and a lot less on what we did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To prosecute is to acknowledge that this particular violence was not redemptive, and to thereby cast a shadow on the "America as Moral Superpower" myth that drives so much of our culture.

This is why so many discussions about waterboarding have involved hypothetical scenarios in which the person being interrogated definitely possesses information that could prevent the deaths of thousands or even millions of Americans. In that case the violence can easily (if mistakenly) be seen as being redemptive in character for the community. We save many through harming one.

Redemptive violence in American culture almost always involves harming the "other", however--never ourselves. Sabato's quote points to that, too. We avoid making the responsible choices that would cause us pain and instead are always focused outwards, ignoring the forces that are slowly but surely poisoning us from within...