For Romel Broom, death will coming knocking a second time. He is being given a week to recover from the 18 needle injuries he sustained earlier this week, and is due to be executed again on Tuesday. Unbelievably, he is not the first to experience this.
In 1946, a similar bungle occurred when the teenager, Willie Francis, survived the electric chair. During the jolt, he screamed “I’m not dying!” Francis’ attorneys subsequently appealed that a “second” execution would violate the double jeopardy rule (as well as the Eighth Amendment which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment). The appeal failed and Francis did not survive the second attempt at taking his life.
Stories of grotesque bungles abound in death penalty literature. In May 1992, it took Texan officials 47 minutes to execute Billy Wayne White, a former drug user. Randy Wool, also a drug addict, was forced to assist technicians to find a suitable vein. Violent convulsions were not uncommon, and hence a paralytic drug is now introduced into the blood stream before the lethal drug is administered. The paralytic, amongst other things, prevents the diaphragm from working, effectively suffocating the inmate. Perhaps worst of all is the story of Raymond Landry. Two minutes into the execution, the syringe flew out of Raymond’s vein, spraying deadly chemical across the room towards witnesses. The syringe had to be reinserted as Raymond was half dead. It took 24 minutes for him to die.
Not only is the death penalty clumsy, it is costly. It is estimated that it is at least ten times more expensive for a District Attorney to seek the death penalty, as opposed to second degree murder. Then there are appeals that run for decades and cost millions. As a general political trend, it is also proving harder for DAs to obtain the death penalty than it once was. It may only be a matter of time before a majority number of states, like New Jersey, outlaw capital punishment. This will be significant for when a case comes before the US Supreme Court. Under the Eighth Amendment, cruel or unusual punishment is considered unconstitutional. One of the ways the Supreme Court defines “cruel and unusual” is by considering the public opinion on the issue by considering the number of states which have retained capital punishment. Once there is a majority of state against the death penalty, the US Supreme Court may well consider it unconstitutional.
This would be a huge step forward for human rights. It unfortunately only represents the tip of the iceberg.
Prison may be an awful place to die, but equally, it is an awful place to live. There are 82 prisoners held by the State of Louisiana currently sentenced to death. There are 4280 people in the State who are sentenced to life without parole. Paradoxically, there is an incentive for defendants to avoid pleading to life, as a capital offender has a statutory right to legal representation for appeals if he or she is indigent (unlike those sentenced to life without parole). The untold story, as Jeff Sparrow points out, is that prisons are fast becoming what the workhouse was to 19th century England: a waste disposal unit for “the poor, the crazy or the simply forgotten”.
In a society that is untroubled by the horror of Romel Broom’s botched execution, it is no surprise that there is indifference to the sense of hopelessness for prisoners facing life without parole. In some prisoners’ final statements, they talk about the relief of death, that it would have been harder to serve life. Louisiana has some of the most violent prisons in the country (in particular, the notorious is Angola). As document by Dave Eggers in his recent book Zeitoun, these prisoners suffered appalling treatment in the wake of hurricane Katrina. They were denied food, water and shelter for days, whilst being conscripted to build holding pens to hold people arrested by the National Guard in the days after the storm. The similarities with Guantanamo were haunting.
How a society treats people who seek its mercy reflects the strength of its justice system and its moral fibre. The social problems reflected through the prism of criminality are too sophisticated to be addressed through the blunt instrument of prison sentences. There is no denying that many of these people are no angels and in some cases, they are not able to live and function in society. But condemning people to die is barbaric. Equally, condemning them to a life without dignity, respect or hope is nearly as bad.
Lizzie O’Shea is a lawyer interning at the Capital Post Conviction Project of Louisiana in New Orleans, which represents indigent prisoners on death row in their State and Federal Appeals.
Are the other alternatives? I’d be interested to hear.
There was a lawyer from the US visiting Australia a month or so ago. He’s a Professor who teachers at a major University in the US. He takes up cases of people on death row who have always asserted their innocence. This started with his students becoming involved in a case – they do the ‘leg work’ which includes interviewing relevant people, visiting the crime scene and having many discussions with the convicted person – all too frequently poor and black! His relevations were horrifying. They included the fact, that all too frequently the neighbourhood cop has little or no experience in homicides; doesn’t ensure that the crime scene is forensically examined and protected; takes the word of so-called witnesses who, in too many cases aren’t definite, or even not been able to pick the person in a line-up; and all too frequently, racism is a factor – every black person looks the same scenario! If the convicted person admitted guilt somewhere along the line, then that’s it – it often involves innocent people being executed.
What I found really chilling, was the Judges often comment, that to reopen the case or admit that the convicted person is innocent, would result in the people losing faith in the justice system. Killing innocent people is better than the justice system being embarrassed? As the Professor said, they don’t wonder what impression the people have when they know that innocent people have been executed. I recall reading, that while George W Bush was Governor of Texas, he signed 137 death warrants. At the time of the article, there were at least 9 of those subsequently found to be innocent – there’s probably more now. Too late after the person is dead! Oooopppps! Sorry! doesn’t really suffice does it?
I find the death penalty abhorrent – it’s state sponsored murder in my view. It’s saying, ‘we don’t know what to do with you, so we’ll kill you’? It’s been proven, that it doesn’t act as a deterrent, and it’s all about revenge, not justice. White rich criminals, including murderers, frequently/always get off. You get the justice you can afford to pay for in too many cases!
PS. This man was a guest on Richard Fydlers, Conversation Hour on ABC Radio. The interviews can be accessed on the internet! Very interesting person with an amazing story to tell. How he selects his clients; how his students go about the research etc.
Our attitude towards the death penalty is sometimes intriguing, to say the least. We do not mind capital punishment for i.e Bali bombers, ‘islamic terrorists’, or Iraqi scientists or many, many civilians being killed without a trial because ‘they might be associated with terrorists’.
I would probably support capital punishment providing we, in the West at least, had independent juidiciary and squeaky clean lawmakers..
It is sad that we still debate such issues. Personally, I believe killing is wrong, and therefore the death penalty should not exist.
@ Rena
“We do not mind capital punishment for i.e Bali bombers…”
Really? You’ve heard people take this position? For me, they need to sit in jail for the rest of their lives after facing trial.