"GETTING INTO ALL OF THE FACTS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT IS CLEAR THAT WE LIVE WITH AN IMPERFECT JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE SYSTEM MAKES MISTAKES. WRONG PEOPLE ARE ACCUSED AND CONVICTED. WITNESSES SOMETIMES MISREMEMBER THE FACTS, AND SOMETIMES THEY LIE FOR THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST. SOMETIMES COPS MAKE MISTAKES, AND SOMETIMES PROSECUTORS REACH THE WRONG CONCLUSIONS.
BUT THE DEATH PENALTY, WHEN CARRIED OUT, IS ALWAYS PERFECT. IT ALWAYS KILLS THE TARGET, AND KILLS THE TARGET PERMANENTLY. AND ONCE YOU KILL THE ACCUSED, YOU CAN’T REALLY TURN BACK THE CLOCK. IF THE SYSTEM TURNS OUT TO BE WRONG, AS IT DOES ON OCCASION, SAYING YOU ARE SORRY DOESN’T DO MUCH GOOD...
DNA TESTING HAS PROVEN TO BE BAD FOR THE DEATH PENALTY. DOING THOSE TESTS AFTER THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN KILLED, AND FINDING OUT THAT THE ACCUSED WAS ACTUALLY INNOCENT (WHICH HAS HAPPENED ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION), HAS RAISED QUESTIONS IN MY MIND ABOUT WHY WE HAVE THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE FIRST PLACE."
JOHN FEEHERY: THE PUNDIT'S BLOG;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 besides those caused by the fire. Neighbors also testified that Willingham did not try hard enough to save his children. They allege he "crouched down" in his front yard and watched the house burn for a period of time without attempting to enter the home or go to neighbors 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."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"WITHOUT
"I never agree with Bob Herbert, the New York Times columnist," John Feehery's August 1, 2009 post on the Pundit's Blog, under the heading "Is the death penalty defensible?", begins.
"But on this one, he may have a point," Feehery continues.
"He wrote a column today about the plight of Cameron Todd Willingham, a Texan who was put to death for the crime of starting a fire in his own home, a fire that killed his three small children.
He was charged with murder, and refused to take a plea deal because he insisted that he was innocent. It turned out that he was right and the folks who had him executed him were wrong. Later evidence proved to exonerate him, but that exoneration did little good. He is still dead.
Without getting into all of the facts in this particular case, it is clear that we live with an imperfect justice system. The system makes mistakes. Wrong people are accused and convicted. Witnesses sometimes misremember the facts, and sometimes they lie for their own self-interest. Sometimes cops make mistakes, and sometimes prosecutors reach the wrong conclusions.
But the death penalty, when carried out, is always perfect. It always kills the target, and kills the target permanently. And once you kill the accused, you can’t really turn back the clock. If the system turns out to be wrong, as it does on occasion, saying you are sorry doesn’t do much good.
DNA testing has proven to be bad for the death penalty. Doing those tests after the accused has been killed, and finding out that the accused was actually innocent (which has happened on more than one occasion), has raised questions in my mind about why we have the death penalty in the first place.
Like many Americans, I used to be a strong proponent of the death penalty. In the 1970s, when crime was out of control, when our cities became shooting galleries, and when gang-bangers and drug bandits preyed on the innocent and the unarmed, the death penalty was seen as one tool to combat lawlessness.
But that tool has been applied all too often with a tint of unfairness. There is a perception, whether it is true or not, that blacks are more likely to get death than whites. And in too many cases, for my taste, innocent people have been put to death.
I understand why the death penalty is still popular in some parts of the country, especially where crime is still prevalent. I also understand and appreciate the desire to put some evil-doers to death, especially monsters like John Wayne Gacy and Jeffery Dahmer. And I get why the death penalty is a very good tool for law enforcement to compel convictions of suspects who will plead guilty to avoid the gas chamber.
But I am bothered by the examples of people who are put to death even though they are innocent, like the one mentioned by Bob Herbert today. We should rethink the death penalty in this country. If even one innocent person is wrongly put to death on behalf of the state, for me, that is enough to get rid of it."
The post can be found at:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/crime/56927-is-the-death-penalty-defensible
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
