"AS THE CHURCH HAS LONG TAUGHT, THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT THE PROPER RESPONSE TO CRIME AND VIOLENCE. SOCIETY HAS BOTH THE RIGHT AND DUTY TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS, BUT MODERN SOCIETY HAS THE CAPACITY TO DO SO WITHOUT RESORTING TO THE EXECUTION OF CRIMINALS.
PERHAPS THE GOOD THAT MIGHT COME FROM THE TRAGIC DEATH OF THREE YOUNG GIRLS IN A HOUSE FIRE AND THE EGREGIOUS ACTIONS OF THE STATE IN THE EXECUTION OF THEIR FATHER MIGHT OPEN THE EYES OF OUR NATION TO THE FAILED SYSTEM THAT HAS VERY LIKELY EXECUTED AN INNOCENT MAN."
GUEST COMMENTARY: DIOCESE OF TENNESSEE;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: (Wikipedia); Cameron Todd Willingham (January 9, 1968 – February 17, 2004), born in Carter County, Oklahoma, was sentenced to death by the state of Texas for murdering his three daughters—two year old Amber Louise Kuykendall, and one year old twins Karmon Diane Willingham and Kameron Marie Willingham— by setting his house on fire. The fire occurred on December 23, 1991 in Corsicana, Texas. Lighter fluid was kept on the front porch of Willingham’s house as evidenced by a melted container found there. Some of this fluid may have entered the front doorway of the house carried along by fire hose water. It was alleged this fluid was deliberately poured to start the fire and that Willingham chose this entrance way so as to impede rescue attempts. The prosecution also used other arson theories that have since been brought into question. In addition to the arson evidence, a jailhouse informant claimed Willingham confessed that he set the fire to hide his wife's physical abuse of the girls, although the girls showed no other injuries besiighbors for help or request they call firefighters. He claimed that he tried to go back into the house but it was "too hot". As firefighters arrived, however, he rushed towards the garage and pushed his car away from the burning building, requesting firefighters do the same rather than put out the fire. After the fire, Willingham showed no emotion at the death of his children and spent the next day sorting through the debris, laughing and playing music. He expressed anger after finding his dartboard burned in the fire. Firefighters and other witnesses found him suspicious of how he reacted during and after the fire. Willingham was charged with murder on January 8, 1992. During his trial in August 1992, he was offered a life term in exchange for a guilty plea, which he turned down insisting he was innocent. After his conviction, he and his wife divorced. She later stated that she believed that Willingham was guilty. Prosecutors alleged this was part of a pattern of behavior intended to rid himself of his children. Willingham had a history of committing crimes, including burglary, grand larceny and car theft. There was also an incident when he beat his pregnant wife over the stomach with a telephone to induce a miscarriage. When asked if he had a final statement, Willingham said: "Yeah. The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man - convicted of a crime I did not commit. I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do. From God's dust I came and to dust I will return - so the earth shall become my throne. I gotta go, road dog. I love you Gabby." However, his final words were directed at his ex-wife, Stacy Willingham. He turned to her and said "I hope you rot in hell, bitch" several times while attempting to extend his middle finger in an obscene gesture. His ex-wife did not show any reaction to this. He was executed by lethal injection on February 17, 2004. Subsequent to that date, persistent questions have been raised as to the accuracy of the forensic evidence used in the conviction, specifically, whether it can be proven that an accelerant (such as the lighter fluid mentioned above) was used to start the fatal fire. Fire investigator Gerald L. Hurst reviewed the case documents including the trial transcriptions and an hour-long videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene. Hurst said, "There's nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While following developments in the Cameron Todd Willingham case over the past few months I have been shocked by the silence over the execution of an innocent man by America's churches, synagogues and mosques.
Why are they not railing over the execution of an innocent man and the death penalty system that unjustly took his life.
So I was pleased to see the following "guest commentary" by the Diocese of Tennessee - published by the Catholic News Service - which ran Wednesday under the heading, "Innocent man’s execution shows shame of death penalty."
"The death penalty may have finally crossed a shameful line that, if there is any sense of reason or justice in American society, should bring the practice to a swift and final end," the commentary begins.
"The state of Texas, despite all of the safeguards that proponents of the death penalty claim would prevent this from happening, may have executed an innocent man," it continues.
"A story in the Sept. 7 issue of The New Yorker details the case of Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed on Feb. 17, 2004, by lethal injection in the Texas death house at the state prison in Huntsville. Texas has made the most prolific use of the death penalty since its re–establishment in 1977.
Willingham was convicted of murdering his three young children after they died in a house fire on Dec. 23, 1991, in Corsicana, Texas. The unemployed auto mechanic had been at home watching the children while his wife was shopping for Christmas presents for their three daughters. He told investigators that his 2–year–old daughter woke him from a nap saying that the house was on fire, but his attempts to rescue the children failed.
Investigators determined that the fire was arson, although there was a history of the children tampering with a space heater used to warm part of the small house where the family lived in a rundown, failed oil town.
However, later reviews of the case by arson and forensics experts determined that investigators used a combination of junk science and folklore to reach their flawed conclusion of arson.
Willingham quickly became the prime suspect, and like most poor defendants, had weak legal representation. As his case worked its way through the process, he steadfastly professed his innocence, to the point of rejecting a plea bargain that would have spared him the death penalty. But based on essentially unchallenged “scientific” evidence, he went to his death.
All of the safeguards failed.
In an interview before his execution, Willingham told The Associated Press he was innocent. “The most distressing thing is the state of Texas will kill an innocent man and doesn’t care they’re making a mistake,” he said.
In a U.S. Supreme Court case decided this summer, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his opinion that “a criminal defendant proved guilty after a fair trial does not have the same liberty interests as a free man.” Which raises a question: can a trial be fair if an innocent person is convicted?
That there are wrongly convicted inmates on death row is nothing new. Well over 100 people on the nation’s death rows have been shown to be completely innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted through scientific reviews of their cases. How many others, without access to the technology and resources that could prove their innocence have been walked to their death in a prison execution chamber? How many have died unjustly, all in the name of justice?
We are not so naive to believe that everyone on death row is innocent. Prisons across the country are filled with guilty people paying their debt to society. But we shouldn’t strip someone of their dignity when they enter prison, like it’s an old T–shirt. The dignity God gives every person follows them every step of their life. As Catholics, we pray the guilty will repent and be redeemed. And we must demand that the innocent receive justice.
As the church has long taught, the death penalty is not the proper response to crime and violence. Society has both the right and duty to protect its citizens, but modern society has the capacity to do so without resorting to the execution of criminals.
Perhaps the good that might come from the tragic death of three young girls in a house fire and the egregious actions of the state in the execution of their father might open the eyes of our nation to the failed system that has very likely executed an innocent man."
The "guest commentary" can be found at:
http://www.thefloridacatholic.org/oped/2009_oped/2009_editorial_archive/20090923_editorial.php
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
