Warning - Death Penalty Rant

So New Jersey has banned the death penalty. Let's all shout hurray for John fucking Corzine, the miserable shitbag behind this limp-wristed decision. He tried to keep his "anti-crime" mask on as he stressed that this was supposed to be about the risk of someone being wrongly executed rather than a moral issue, but let's face the facts: this is about a minority with a certain moral hang-up imposing their will on the majority. Here's what he said:

"It's a day of progress for the state of New Jersey and for the millions of people across our nation and around the globe who reject the death penalty as a moral or practical response to the grievous, even heinous, crime of murder."

We are sometimes reminded, when politicians refuse to accede to the will of the public they supposedly serve, that we live in a representative democracy as opposed to a true democracy, i.e. one in which we elect people to represent us but cannot expect them to act in accord with the opinion of the majority. In a recent poll 78% of New Jersey voters favored keeping the death penalty for the most heinous cases, so Corzine can hardly be said to be representing the people who elected him on this issue.

But what about the problems with the current system? New Jerseyans For Alternatives To The Death Penalty commented that the change in the law would ensure that "justice is swift and certain", presumably in contrast to the old system of endless appeals. Let's look at that assertion shall we? Firstly, what about "justice"? One of the beneficiaries of this change will be a repeat sex offender who murdered a seven year-old girl. He does not deserve to live - death is an appropriate punishment. No cogent argument can be made for extending his miserable worthless life; remorse is of absolutely no meaning after a murderer has been caught, and I simply do not buy into the idea that this type of criminal should be given a chance to "turn their lives around" in prison. Punishment serves a serious purpose - it rids the planet of some scum, and it sends a message to other scum that there are consequences for acting out their sick desires. Saving his life does not constitute "justice". Secondly, why should the death penalty not be as "swift and certain" as life without parole? The main reason that the process is so fucked up today is that criminals who have perpetrated the most disgusting crimes are provided with limitless opportunities for appeal, all at the expense of the public, and all so that the liberal whiners who are so richly represented in the legal profession can sleep easy in their beds.

If the death penalty were meted out quickly, with appeal only in the case of serious legal doubt, then it would not only be "swift" but its deterrent value would be greatly enhanced. One of the saddest ironies of the criminal justice system today is that were I to plan and carry out a murder for the purpose of financial gain I might face the death penalty, whereas if I befriended a pregnant woman, attacked her, ripped out her baby and left her to die, or if I killed my children one by one, or dismembered strangers in my bathtub, I would be able to claim that I must be "insane" and therefore exempt not just from the death penalty but from any prison time. Just send me to a hospital until I get better and then I'll come and live by your family.

It is true that some people on death row have subsequently been found to be "not guilty" but this is true of those receiving life sentences as well. The real problem is one inherent in the jury system - those on trial will be judged not by their peers but by the best jury of available bodies their lawyer can engineer. Defense lawyers are notoriously averse to anyone who appears to be educated or middle class as they tend to be rational and more likely to convict on the facts. It is well known that the best way to avoid jury service in a criminal trial is to wear a suit to the selection. Add to this that vast numbers of the public are stupid. There's no other way to put it - half the population is of below average intelligence, some of them woefully below. There is no critical reasoning test to determine if a jury member is even able to make logical deductions based on simple facts, let alone process all the information thrown at them during a potentially long trial. In some cases people have been convicted simply on the belief of the jury that they were guilty, even though there was insufficient evidence presented to enable a conviction on a standard of "beyond reasonable doubt". Rapists are convicted on the basis of a simple identification by a traumatised victim (yes it has happened) and only later does DNA testing prove that they were not the attacker, begging the question "How could someone be convicted on such flimsy evidence?" Whose fault is that? Don't we have judges to make sure that legal standards are met?

There are enough cases where neither the guilt of the criminal nor the horror of the crime is in doubt that can justify a sentence of death. The failure of the legal profession to find a way to make this system work speaks to their lack of will to truly make the death penalty a part of a functioning justice system - they would rather wring their hands about the problems than solve them.

So why is that? What makes Republicans join Democrats in creating this murderer's charter in New Jersey? Look at their belief systems. For these people the death penalty issue, in spite of all the dressing up which is applied to it, is simply a moral one. On the one hand you have the liberal left looking to fall in line with their buddies at the UN and Amnesty International in condemning the death penalty in any form (see Corzine's comments about "millions around the globe" - just what the fuck do they have to do with New Jersey law?). On the other you have those on the right whose misguided religious beliefs hold that all life is sacred; this apparently extends to scum as well as to bundles of reproductive cells.

So let's all go to bed happy that some of the vilest slime in New Jersey have been spared the "cruel and unusual punishment" of execution. Never mind their victims, who died in fear and pain, alone and without help. We can forget them now and turn our attention to the interests of the murderers instead. Forget justice - that's a dirty word in these enlightened liberal days; let's think rehabilitation and other happy thoughts. And forget the lives that could have been saved by a firmer system of punishment; they are an "inconvenient truth" in this whole sham.


Copyright © Edward Bison 2007