I’m having a tough time keeping this updated, but I will not give up. I still have some relatively interesting things to say, here and there, and I’ll try to keep the loyal readers happy.
First, I have less than 72 hours before I’ll be back in Atlanta for Christmas break. I’m excited that I don’t have any finals (just a regular test on Friday). I’m very excited for the trip to Memphis, TN and Tunica, MS for New Year’s — Graceland, Gambling, and free drinks (nothing I really like to drink begins with a “G”).
It’s always weird packing for Christmas: I usually end up throwing all my dirty clothes in a basket and saying “I’ll wash them at home, and that way I won’t have to decide what to pack.” A strategy I’m likely to repeat this year.
On a more intense note:
Katie asked me to write about the recent events surrounding the execution of Tookie Williams in California. This required that I do a little reading on what has been happening (cause I knew very little about it, despite the apparent news barrage). This man, founder of the Crips gang, was convicted in 1981 for killing 4 people in two robberies that occurred in 1979. Since his trial and sentencing 24 years ago, he has been writing against the gang lifestyle. In the time preceding his execution, many supporters cited these works as proof that he has been reformed and should not be executed; however, Governer Schwartzeneggar disagreed and denied clemency.
That ends the factual part of this entry. I will now give some opinions:
First, I was surprised that California still had the death penalty. Maybe not for long…although Arnold is a Republican and relatively conservative governer so i shouldn’t be too surprised. The death penalty currently exists in 36/50 states (and I thought Georgia and Texas were in the minority…).
My problem with this case: it is cruel and unusual, in my opinion, to have a 24 year delay between a death penalty sentence and an execution. I understand that appeals are an important part of our legal system, and that the accused has the right to a fair trial. I also understand that technology, including DNA evidence etc, can greatly impact the outcome of a case. However, for the death penalty to do its job — deter extremely violent crime and punish offenders who are deemed “unreformable” — there must be a link between the crime and the punishment. I am currently in my 18th year of formal education and am 23 years old; however, Williams was on Death Row before I was born. If the execution had occurred within a year of the sentencing, I doubt that Joan Baez would be in front of San Quentin calling this execution “planned, efficient, calculated, antiseptic, cold-blooded murder.”
I totally believe that 24 years in prison has the potential to reform someone. However, Williams did not receive a life sentence. He received the death penalty. The right to a speedy trial should be accompanied by a speedy sentence. If you receive jail time, that sentence begins the moment you leave the courtroom. It’s contradictory, and cruel, to have a 24 year gap between the handing-down of a death sentence and the time of execution.
If you don’t believe in the death penalty, I won’t try to convince you. This is a “hot” issue and will always cause an intense debate. But, the law is the law. If you don’t like the law, you should have it changed (by electing legislators that will pass laws you like and repeal the laws you don’t like). And don’t tell me “that is unrealistic” — that’s how the system works.
(Of course, when judicial review exists, it doesn’t exactly work that way — so elect a president that will appoint judges that will uphold laws you believe in…blah blah blah you get the point. By the way, it’s important to note that judicial review is not technically Constitutional: the Supreme Court gave itself the right to repeal laws in 1803. The role of the Supreme court in the “checks and balances” system is not outlined in the Constitution. Initially, the Supreme court was just the highest Appellate court, taking appeals from cases heard by lower courts– law students feel free to chime in and correct me)
Back on topic.
The argument is pretty strong, looking at the original charges and conviction, that if anyone deserved to die for a crime, it was Williams: four murders committed during robberies. Additionally, he established a bloody gang that has likely cost hundreds of young lives in LA and throughout the country.
House is almost on, and I’ve wasted enough time blabbing on with this. Please comment if you agree, but more importantly: if you disagree, I want to hear about it.
One callous and probably inappropriate point to consider: without the gang wars of the 90s, would the current music scene be where it is today? Snoop Dogg was a member of the Crips — something to think about. Does hip-hop owe its current commercial success to a history of violence? Poverty, and the escape from it, have obviously played a big role in hip-hop. But the direct impact of gang violence on today’s music is something that I haven’t given too much thought. Comment and let me know.
Or you could just make fun of me for writing so much when nobody is likely to read it all…
-t
