You’ll remember that story from a month or so back about how Texas executed an almost certainly innocent man.
The New Yorker revealed that, during Todd Willingham’s trial for supposedly burning his children to death, the prosecution explained away the puzzling absence of motive by diagnosing sociopathology, partly because a psychologist (a specialist in marriage counseling — but no matter) lectured the court on the Satanic significance of Iron Maiden and Led Zeppelin.
The jailhouse informant whose testimony implicated Willingham later recanted, while a subsequent forensic researcher described the arson investigation on which the case hinged as employing a methodology more “characteristic of mystics or psychics” than scientists.
The best available research suggests that the fatal fire almost certainly began with an electrical fault, just as the defence had always maintained.
Nonetheless, in February 2004, prison guards carried Willingham into the death chamber, strapped him onto a gurney and injected him with sodium thiopental to paralyse him, pancuronium bromide to collapse his lungs, and potassium chloride to stop his heart.
Now, insofar as there are arguments in support of the modern state murdering people to discourage murder, they rest upon the assumption that it’s the correct party who ends up with the poison in his veins. There’s no “closure” (to employ the preferred piece of psychobabble) for victims’ loved ones in watching an innocent man die; there’s no deterrence in executing the guiltless.
You’d think, then, that investigating the fiasco through which Todd Willingham lost his life would be a political priority, even for social conservatives. But you’d be wrong.
In the US system, the state governor signs off on capital sentences. In Texas, Governor Rick Perry has so far presided over more than 200 executions.
Documents from the Willingham case show that, at 4.52pm on the day of the execution, Perry’s office received forensic testimony throwing into doubt the guilty verdict. Yet by 5pm — that is, with less than 10 minutes deliberation, Perry had refused to grant a stay. Willingham died at 6.20pm.
Perry is, in other words, stained up to his elbows in Willingham’s blood. And, not surprisingly, he’s now doing his best to derail any investigation of the affair.
The Obsidan Wings blog reports that an inquiry into Willingham’s execution was to present its findings on October 2. But on September 30, Perry replaced three members of the investigating panel, including the chair, expressly against their witnesses. The new chairman cancelled the hearing — and Perry then removed a fourth member.
Perhaps one should expect such shenanigans out in the Wild West. Perry is, after all, notorious wingnut, who attracted a certain notoriety after encouraging secessionist rhetoric at an Austin “Tea Party” rally.
But why is the national media allowing such an obvious cover-up to pass with so little comment?
Here’s one explanation. Guilty or not, Willingham — tattooed and poor, uneducated and inarticulate — was still a pretty typical representative of the death-row population. Support for capital punishment has long been de rigueur for ambitious politicians, precisely because the Willinghams of the world have so few champions and thus provide a convenient outlet for “tough-on-crime” rhetoric.
Perry is not the only careerist to have clambered to high office upon the bodies of the executed. Willingham’s innocence might be unfortunate but, in and of itself, it’s not going to change anything.
Jeff – good article – you said “Perry is not the only careerist to have clambered to high office upon the bodies of the executed” – some famour that I can recall – Sir Henry Bolte (of course) and the main one I recall is Bill Clinton.
Clinton almost certainly executed a black man (or allowed it) who should not have been, by reasons of insanity. As you are probably aware, in the USA you can’t execute someone if they can’t understand what is happening. The convict, apart from his lawyer demonstrating a lack of understanding, when on his way to his exeuction, asked the guard to hold the ice-cream (it may have been jelly – I can’t recall) from his last meal because he would eat it when he came back to his cell.
On the day of the execution Clinton’s press release said he was hearing last minute appeals. However when you hear the only lawyer (who by the way was a former friend of Clinton’s) representing the man say that he couldn’t get through all day, you begin to wonder why. Was it because he was meeting with staff and trying to work out how to handle the Jennifer Flowers issue that had just exploded the night before? Or was it just because he needed to show he was tough on crime because he was getting caned in the democratic primaries because he never served his country?
This is the main reason I cannot and will never support the death penalty – and there really is no effective counter argument. I will not give politicians the power of life and death because they will make their choice, not based on compassion, the facts of the case, misscarriages of justice or anything other than what is the best decision that advantages them politically. If “a good hanging is worth 10 points” (Bolte -sic) they will do it.
Jeff, I have only one word, really. Wow. I could only read your article open-mouthed with disbelief. Naive, probably, but still….
The US really is a weird place, and unjust in a way I think few Australians understand in terms of how far injustice can go. There’s nothing to be gained from comparing one miscarriage of justice with another, but the death penalty really does pack a punch when it comes to talking about appalling treatment of undeserving people.
Wow.
It really seems to me that more than any other part of the Western world the US places a low value on human life. Death penalty, the insane attitude to guns, a general culture of violence and an addiction to wars of aggression. It’s also by far the most religious. Co-incidence?