It doesn't get any easier. I wrote several friends, some people I know and pastor who asked me to check in with him afterward.
"If it is this hard for me, a relatively disinterested party, how hard must it be for Christopher Scott Emmett? For his family? For John F. Langley's family? For everyone who knows those involved?"
What about the victims of all the men and women who are on death row? Who remembers them? Going back to my original post, where I talk about looking in Emmett's eyes, it occurs to me again and again - how do you look in the victim's eyes? It's a heck of a job I have - not just on this story, but on them all.
How do we do it? How do we look into the eyes of the mother who's burying a son or daughter killed in Iraq? How do we look into the eyes of a family who's just lost someone to a drunk driver or a drive-by shooting? How do we look into the eyes of a welfare mother whose children were playing with matches and burned their house down? What is it about this job that we spend so much time looking into the eyes of tragedy?
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
They're still waiting....
Christopher Scott Emmett escaped the needle again. While the U.S. Supreme Court continues to decide whether lethal injection is "cruel and unusual" Emmett will breathe. He will sleep. He will curse. He will laugh. He will talk - however limitedly, with the other men on death row. And there are many others.
They’re all still waiting. Twenty in Virginia. Three-hundred and ninety-three in Texas, One hundred and seven in both Tennessee and Georgia and 41 in Kentucky. The future of 3,350 death row inmates in 37 states now appears to rest on a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding two inmates in Kentucky. As of January those are the numbers Reported by the Death Penalty Informaiton Center. There are hundreds of websites with the numbers of those on death row. It’s easy to find out how they spend their day, who visited them, how long they’ve been on death row.
Romell Broom, Ohio’s next execution, scheduled for the 18th, was stayed. Jack Alderman of Georgia also got a reprieve from his Oct. 19 death date for the 1974 murder of Barbara Jean Alderman. Curtis Osborne of Georgia, scheduled to die Oct. 23 for the murders of Arthur Lee Jones and Linda Lisa Seabourne may actually be executed.
According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Osborne’s execution date is proceeding as planned, although his attorneys are expected to plead for a stay pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the Kentucky case. Both Georgia inmates have exhausted their appeals.
In Tennessee, Gov. Phil Bredesen commuted Michael Joe Boyd’s death sentence for the murder of a man during an armed robbery to life without parole. Alabama’s Daniel Siebert is still waiting for word on his 25th death date. And in Mississippi, the day before Halloween, Mississippi will have to make a call on Earl Wesley Berry’s execution date.
Their crimes range from Christopher Scott Emmett’s bludgeoning of his friend and roommate with a brass hotel lamp to the strangulation, shootings, stabbings and brutal and often prolonged deaths of their victims.
And while the men and women on death row wait – so their victims’ families. For those whose loved ones were raped, shot in the eye or the back of the head – like Jones and Seabourne, or bludgeoned with a lamp like Gene Langley there are no statistics.
There are no numbers of the amount of birthdays that have been missed. No record of the milestones the victims have missed – weddings, grandchildren, graduations, children, summers, holidays with family members. No one keeps track of the grief counseling, the broken marriages, the nightmares, the broken lives.
But for at least another month – the U.S. Supreme Court will debate, argue and wonder if the three minutes of pain caused to an inmate strapped to a table for a violent murder – constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
They’re all still waiting. Twenty in Virginia. Three-hundred and ninety-three in Texas, One hundred and seven in both Tennessee and Georgia and 41 in Kentucky. The future of 3,350 death row inmates in 37 states now appears to rest on a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding two inmates in Kentucky. As of January those are the numbers Reported by the Death Penalty Informaiton Center. There are hundreds of websites with the numbers of those on death row. It’s easy to find out how they spend their day, who visited them, how long they’ve been on death row.
Romell Broom, Ohio’s next execution, scheduled for the 18th, was stayed. Jack Alderman of Georgia also got a reprieve from his Oct. 19 death date for the 1974 murder of Barbara Jean Alderman. Curtis Osborne of Georgia, scheduled to die Oct. 23 for the murders of Arthur Lee Jones and Linda Lisa Seabourne may actually be executed.
According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Osborne’s execution date is proceeding as planned, although his attorneys are expected to plead for a stay pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the Kentucky case. Both Georgia inmates have exhausted their appeals.
In Tennessee, Gov. Phil Bredesen commuted Michael Joe Boyd’s death sentence for the murder of a man during an armed robbery to life without parole. Alabama’s Daniel Siebert is still waiting for word on his 25th death date. And in Mississippi, the day before Halloween, Mississippi will have to make a call on Earl Wesley Berry’s execution date.
Their crimes range from Christopher Scott Emmett’s bludgeoning of his friend and roommate with a brass hotel lamp to the strangulation, shootings, stabbings and brutal and often prolonged deaths of their victims.
And while the men and women on death row wait – so their victims’ families. For those whose loved ones were raped, shot in the eye or the back of the head – like Jones and Seabourne, or bludgeoned with a lamp like Gene Langley there are no statistics.
There are no numbers of the amount of birthdays that have been missed. No record of the milestones the victims have missed – weddings, grandchildren, graduations, children, summers, holidays with family members. No one keeps track of the grief counseling, the broken marriages, the nightmares, the broken lives.
But for at least another month – the U.S. Supreme Court will debate, argue and wonder if the three minutes of pain caused to an inmate strapped to a table for a violent murder – constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
Monday, October 15, 2007
How time flies
Has it been four months already? Again - it's time to prepare for Christopher Scott Emmett's execution. Once on the list, forever on the list for that execution. I'm being told that "It won't happen," the Supreme Court will intervene, there will be another stay. I don't know. I rented "Dead Man Walking" and watched it tonight. For months I've not thought of this, and now it occupies my days again.
I don't mean to be flippant, but how time flies. I've lost three friends/acquaintances to death - one by suicide, one by cancer, one by a traffic accident. None of us have a guarantee of life - or death. That much is obvious. But Emmett's fate this Wednesday? Who knows....
I don't mean to be flippant, but how time flies. I've lost three friends/acquaintances to death - one by suicide, one by cancer, one by a traffic accident. None of us have a guarantee of life - or death. That much is obvious. But Emmett's fate this Wednesday? Who knows....
Sunday, June 17, 2007
What I learned
What I've learned from this execution process so far is this:
Death is not the issue. Emotions are. I truly and honestly believe that the process of watching Christopher Scott Emmett will not unsettle me. I have seen too much death - from hospice to hospitals to nursing homes to the Rescue Squads I've worked on. What is upsetting to me is witnessing the emotional toll the process takes.
Every war veteran I've ever spoken to has said the same thing, "You don't make friends. They go out and never come back." It's easier to watch a stranger die than a friend die. We know that. It's why rubber-neckers can roll past a horrific automobile accident on the interstate and then be talking about it over dinner with friends like it was a movie they saw. There's no personal connection.
Racism. Make the connection with people of a different race or culture and it becomes harder to hate. When we, as people, connect with others, our entire way of perceiving, relating, judging and even healing, changes.
Defense attorneys know this. They go out of their way to paint the most despicable client as someone who "suffered a bad childhood." They're trying to connect with the jury to elicit a sympathetic response and a lighter sentence. It's calculated, but it works. Should jurors consider the emotional response they feel - if any? The prosecutor painted Emmett for what he was at the time, a crack-head all hopped up on drugs who bludgeoned his sleeping friend to death over $100 for more crack. Nope - not the sort of character you feel all warm and fuzzy about. Even if you'd invited him over for dinner once, you wouldn't do it again after hearing that.
The Defense attorney says Emmett, because of a bad childhood, did drugs. He wants the jury to feel compassion, to cut Emmett some slack, to consider life in prison rather than the death penalty. He wants jurors to think, "What if it had been my son or daughter on drugs and they had killed someone?" Should jurors listen? Do they serve justice best by listening to the facts, or listening to a skillful attorney? Tough call. The judge knows all this is going on - yet, judges too take into account the personal things that help them decide whether a criminal is evil incarnate and fire the death house up NOW, or - life in prison would serve society better (Whatever that means).
If we have to emotionally disconnect to do our jobs, how effectively are we doing our jobs? When we see the world as black and white, or good and bad - how does it affect how we do our jobs? How much disconnect should there be? Where does the "public's right to know" end and the right of the family for emotional and personal privacy begin? Tough call. Journalists make it every day.
I took this assignment because I knew it would challenge me. I just didn't know how much and in what ways. It's more than choosing to watch the state kill a man for a violent crime. It's dipping into the waters of hate, love, revenge, anguish, grief and sorrow and trying to make enough sense of it all - to condense it into a form that readers can take in.
Have I made my readers think more about this issue? I hope so. I've made myself think about it a lot more - and will - in the next months as we wait to see what the U.S. Supreme Court decides.
Death is not the issue. Emotions are. I truly and honestly believe that the process of watching Christopher Scott Emmett will not unsettle me. I have seen too much death - from hospice to hospitals to nursing homes to the Rescue Squads I've worked on. What is upsetting to me is witnessing the emotional toll the process takes.
Every war veteran I've ever spoken to has said the same thing, "You don't make friends. They go out and never come back." It's easier to watch a stranger die than a friend die. We know that. It's why rubber-neckers can roll past a horrific automobile accident on the interstate and then be talking about it over dinner with friends like it was a movie they saw. There's no personal connection.
Racism. Make the connection with people of a different race or culture and it becomes harder to hate. When we, as people, connect with others, our entire way of perceiving, relating, judging and even healing, changes.
Defense attorneys know this. They go out of their way to paint the most despicable client as someone who "suffered a bad childhood." They're trying to connect with the jury to elicit a sympathetic response and a lighter sentence. It's calculated, but it works. Should jurors consider the emotional response they feel - if any? The prosecutor painted Emmett for what he was at the time, a crack-head all hopped up on drugs who bludgeoned his sleeping friend to death over $100 for more crack. Nope - not the sort of character you feel all warm and fuzzy about. Even if you'd invited him over for dinner once, you wouldn't do it again after hearing that.
The Defense attorney says Emmett, because of a bad childhood, did drugs. He wants the jury to feel compassion, to cut Emmett some slack, to consider life in prison rather than the death penalty. He wants jurors to think, "What if it had been my son or daughter on drugs and they had killed someone?" Should jurors listen? Do they serve justice best by listening to the facts, or listening to a skillful attorney? Tough call. The judge knows all this is going on - yet, judges too take into account the personal things that help them decide whether a criminal is evil incarnate and fire the death house up NOW, or - life in prison would serve society better (Whatever that means).
If we have to emotionally disconnect to do our jobs, how effectively are we doing our jobs? When we see the world as black and white, or good and bad - how does it affect how we do our jobs? How much disconnect should there be? Where does the "public's right to know" end and the right of the family for emotional and personal privacy begin? Tough call. Journalists make it every day.
I took this assignment because I knew it would challenge me. I just didn't know how much and in what ways. It's more than choosing to watch the state kill a man for a violent crime. It's dipping into the waters of hate, love, revenge, anguish, grief and sorrow and trying to make enough sense of it all - to condense it into a form that readers can take in.
Have I made my readers think more about this issue? I hope so. I've made myself think about it a lot more - and will - in the next months as we wait to see what the U.S. Supreme Court decides.
Wednesday
I saw no protestors at Wednesday's planned execution. Maybe they come later, closer to the time the inmate is scheduled to die. There were media there - lots of them - more than a dozen, all in suits and ties, most seemingly disappointed that Emmett received a stay.
An Associated Press reporter, a woman her colleagues call the "Death Angel" for her ongoing coverage of executions, the Virginia Tech slayings etc., was there. We talked and, a veteran of several executions there herself, she explained what would happen, what to expect. There are two executions she remembers - not for the event, but for the moments when the inmate's eyes met hers.
I didn't see the family. They received word of the stay from the media - who called for comment only to learn that was the first word they'd heard.
I admit. It was disappointing for me - not that the state didn't kill a man - but that, like the family, this isn't over for me. Emmett's execution, barring commutation I suppose, was rescheduled for Oct. 17. When I accepted this assignment I thought it would be over June 13, maybe by June 17 after I wrapped up the blog, wrote the final stories etc. etc. Shock.
It doesn't end now. This must be what it feels like for the families of the victim. It's not about the actual execution. As long as Emmett's alive there is no end to the story. He's alive. For the family that means the emotions, the hate, the anger are alive too. Their "closure" is in seeing Emmett dead. My closure is in seeing Emmett dead or his sentence commuted. The story goes on just as the debate about the death penalty goes on. It's difficult. I feel like I've grabbed a tiger by the tail and I can't let go.
An Associated Press reporter, a woman her colleagues call the "Death Angel" for her ongoing coverage of executions, the Virginia Tech slayings etc., was there. We talked and, a veteran of several executions there herself, she explained what would happen, what to expect. There are two executions she remembers - not for the event, but for the moments when the inmate's eyes met hers.
I didn't see the family. They received word of the stay from the media - who called for comment only to learn that was the first word they'd heard.
I admit. It was disappointing for me - not that the state didn't kill a man - but that, like the family, this isn't over for me. Emmett's execution, barring commutation I suppose, was rescheduled for Oct. 17. When I accepted this assignment I thought it would be over June 13, maybe by June 17 after I wrapped up the blog, wrote the final stories etc. etc. Shock.
It doesn't end now. This must be what it feels like for the families of the victim. It's not about the actual execution. As long as Emmett's alive there is no end to the story. He's alive. For the family that means the emotions, the hate, the anger are alive too. Their "closure" is in seeing Emmett dead. My closure is in seeing Emmett dead or his sentence commuted. The story goes on just as the debate about the death penalty goes on. It's difficult. I feel like I've grabbed a tiger by the tail and I can't let go.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Revenge and anger
I have seen police photos of what criminals do to other people. I can say with no hesitation that those people deserve the death penalty and that lethal injection is too kind. That's an emotional reaction to evil. Whatever brush you paint it with, the death penalty is revenge and punishment - pure and simple. Justify it how you wish, but call it what it is - court sanctioned murder. Would I feel that way after watching an execution? I don't know. I didn't get that chance tonight.
I have also seen battered women in prison for defending themselves against an abusive husband. Their defense or even their retaliation against a husband who raped their daughter or some other horrible crime may have landed them on death row. Can they be rehabilitated? I think some can. I oppose the death penalty for those who are young and in the wrong place at the wrong time, who have no criminal record or history and who are in that small majority that can turn their lives around. Not everyone can, but many do.
The death penalty is an imperfect system. How you feel about it depends on which side of the crime you're on. There are no easy answers. I strongly believe that the death penalty IS a deterrent to crime. There are studies that have shown that. Why isn't the media reporting on that? I don't know. For the same reason they don't report on how many citizens successfully defend themselves against armed criminals with deadly force I suppose.
These are issues that have been debated for decades and will continue to be major social issues. Until the human race changes I don't see this question being resolved either. I have seen small, rural court systems opt NOT to pursue the death penalty because it would bankrupt the county's budget. Great reason eh? How do you explain that to a victim's family? Gee - we don't have it in the budget to pursue the death penalty. How would you feel about this dirt-bag serving life in prison instead? Again - WHY do we pursue the death penalty against some and not others? In many cases - state law. If Emmett hadn't robbed Langley, it wouldn't have been a capital crime.
Like abortion, right-to-life, war and religion - I think this is one of those issues that can't be debated calmly. It's a powder-keg - and should be. After all - lives are at stake....victim's and criminals....
I have also seen battered women in prison for defending themselves against an abusive husband. Their defense or even their retaliation against a husband who raped their daughter or some other horrible crime may have landed them on death row. Can they be rehabilitated? I think some can. I oppose the death penalty for those who are young and in the wrong place at the wrong time, who have no criminal record or history and who are in that small majority that can turn their lives around. Not everyone can, but many do.
The death penalty is an imperfect system. How you feel about it depends on which side of the crime you're on. There are no easy answers. I strongly believe that the death penalty IS a deterrent to crime. There are studies that have shown that. Why isn't the media reporting on that? I don't know. For the same reason they don't report on how many citizens successfully defend themselves against armed criminals with deadly force I suppose.
These are issues that have been debated for decades and will continue to be major social issues. Until the human race changes I don't see this question being resolved either. I have seen small, rural court systems opt NOT to pursue the death penalty because it would bankrupt the county's budget. Great reason eh? How do you explain that to a victim's family? Gee - we don't have it in the budget to pursue the death penalty. How would you feel about this dirt-bag serving life in prison instead? Again - WHY do we pursue the death penalty against some and not others? In many cases - state law. If Emmett hadn't robbed Langley, it wouldn't have been a capital crime.
Like abortion, right-to-life, war and religion - I think this is one of those issues that can't be debated calmly. It's a powder-keg - and should be. After all - lives are at stake....victim's and criminals....
Stay granted
Christopher Scott Emmett should have been dead by now - would have been dead by now if Governor Timothy Kaine had not intervened. The family of victim John Felton is - I would guess - I don't know - feeling devastated and revictimized. They'd waited how many years to see this man dead? On the other hand, in a rare move that actually acknowledges the legal system and attempts to make it work - a life (albeit a cruel and vicious life) has value, actually saved Emmett from death tonight. I can't imagine he will do much more than cry and sleep tonight.
Why was Emmett granted a stay? (He has been scheduled to die on Oct. 17 if no merit is found in his case by then.) Four U.S. Supreme Court Justices agreed to hear the writ of certiorari- meaning they will review his case in the fall. However, five justices are needed to grant stay of execution. Only four voted for a stay. So Governor Kaine stepped in - saying, in an official press release:
Why was Emmett granted a stay? (He has been scheduled to die on Oct. 17 if no merit is found in his case by then.) Four U.S. Supreme Court Justices agreed to hear the writ of certiorari- meaning they will review his case in the fall. However, five justices are needed to grant stay of execution. Only four voted for a stay. So Governor Kaine stepped in - saying, in an official press release:
Office
Timothy M. Kaine FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Governor June 13, 2007
STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR KAINE
“Given the nature of this crime, I have no reason to question the prosecutor’s decision to seek the death penalty or the jury’s decision that death was an appropriate punishment. State and federal courts have consistently upheld Emmett’s conviction and sentence.
“Emmett is scheduled to be executed this evening at 9:00 p.m. He has filed a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court seeking review of his conviction and sentence, as well as a motion to stay his execution. Earlier today, the Court denied his stay motion, with four Justices voting to grant the stay.
“The Court has yet to consider whether to grant Emmett’s writ of certiorari. Under the Rules of the Supreme Court, the writ will be granted if four Justices vote to accept his appeal. The Court does not expect to consider his appeal until late September.
“Basic fairness demands that condemned inmates be allowed the opportunity to complete legal appeals prior to execution. Allowing Emmett’s execution to go forward before the Supreme Court rules on his appeal would foreclose any additional review of his case. The irreversibility of an execution and the fact that four Justices of the Court believe a stay is needed to consider the appeal warrant my intervention in this case.
“Therefore, I delay the execution of Christopher Emmett until October 17th, 2007.
“My thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of the victim.”
# # #
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)