End the death penalty

By Marjorie R. Esman
Guest Columnist

Status and race often the difference between life and death

Clayton Lockett’s execution in Oklahoma in April put the spotlight on everything that’s wrong with capital punishment in a so-called civilized society. The immediate question is, “What went wrong? Why did Mr. Lockett suffer in agonizing pain for over 40 minutes before he finally died of heart failure?” The more important question is, “Why do we continue to engage in this inhumane spectacle in the first place?” The ACLU objects to the death penalty and has worked ardently to end a practice that at its core is barbaric, inhumane and in direct violation of a person’s basic civil liberties. Capital punishment is irrevocable and forever deprives a person the opportunity to benefit from potentially new evidence or even legislation that might reverse or set aside their conviction or eliminate the death penalty altogether.

Those who don’t agree with this argument, might be more inclined to agree with some of the practical considerations why capital punishment should be abolished. Death penalty proponents argue that the threat of execution influences criminal behavior more effectively than imprisonment, but this simply has not proven to be true. The U.S. is the only western industrialized nation that engages in capital punishment. Yet, in spite of incarcerating and “legally” executing more of its people than any other place on the planet, we continue to struggle with disproportionately high rates of violent crime and murder. Simply, executions do not stop people from killing each other. Even law enforcement officials agree. A survey of police chiefs nationwide found they rank the death penalty lowest among ways to reduce violent crime. Economic development, more jobs and reducing drug use were cited as the best ways to reduce violent crime. Still, prosecutors seek the death penalty even though doing so burdens the court system and wastes valuable tax payer dollars. Capital cases squander the time and energies of the D.A.’s office, prosecutors, defense counsel, juries and law enforcement personnel. They take longer to resolve than non-death sentences, because every possible risk of error must be examined thoroughly to prevent the wrongful execution of an innocent person.

Race, Status and the Death Penalty

Like many areas of the criminal justice system that struggle to find fairness across lines of race and class, the death penalty has historically been applied unfairly depending on how much money the defendant has or the color of their skin. Only a small proportion of convicted murderers in the United States receives a death sentence, which speaks to the arbitrary nature of the process. Studies consistently show that people of color are far more likely to be executed than white people, and especially if the victim is white. More people are executed for killing whites than killing minorities. According to a report from the ACLU’s national office, 140 death row inmates in 26 states have been exonerated because of innocence since 1973. Nationally, at least one person is exonerated for every 10 that are executed. We will never know how many innocent people have been put to death. What we do know is that the current system is unfair, valuing the lives of white people over those of minorities.

Lack of Federal Oversight

In 2010, the federal government imposed a moratorium on carrying out executions because of concerns with drug protocols and basic fairness. Yet states are free to create their own protocols with varying results. Wisely, the state of Oklahoma has issued a temporary moratorium on executions until Mr. Lockett’s case is fully investigated. The effects of varying protocols are also being felt here at home in the case of Louisiana inmate Christopher Sepulveda. Sepulveda, a death row inmate for more than 20 years, was given a stay of execution in February so that a thorough investigation could be done on the drugs to be used during his execution and how they were to be administered. Sepulveda’s would have been the first execution carried out in Louisiana since 2010. To this day, it’s unclear what drug protocol would be used in his execution and whether the drugs would lead to a result different from that of Mr. Lockett in Oklahoma. The State of Louisiana is spending enormous amounts of taxpayer funds in an attempt to find and defend a method of execution that will meet Constitutional standards, for no benefit to public safety.

No Place in a Civilized Society

Strong opinions exist on both sides when it comes to the death penalty. Some people think that opposing the death penalty demonstrates a lack of sympathy for the victims and their families. While we certainly sympathize with the victims of violence, we believe that responding with violence, even state-authorized killings, demonstrates a lack of respect for the sanctity of human life and is nothing less than immoral. The fact that the death penalty is applied disproportionately against the poor, people of color, people who killed white people, and people in certain geographic areas adds another layer of injustice. Our Constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment, found in the Eighth Amendment, surely protect us against being killed by our own government, particularly when there are better ways to keep those who might harm others from committing further crimes.

If you op­pose the death penalty call or write your elected officials to express your support for abolishing capital punishment in Louisiana. The death penalty is inconsistent with the values of a democratic society. With your help, through legislation and continued advocacy the ACLU of Louisiana will continue its efforts to end capital punishment in our state.

This article originally published in the May 19, 2014 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.