On the February 3rd
episode of The Practice, an attorney for a killer faced
a difficult decision. She could either medicate her
client, allowing the state to execute her. Or, she
could withhold medication, sparing her life, albeit a
life as an insane person.
When her client became a raging lunatic, her choice
became a bit clearer. She told the doctor to give the
client medicine, making her "sane" again.
Mercifully, a judge reversed the client's death sentence
and sentenced her to life in prison. One might ask
whether the attorney made the right decision. But an
even better question overshadowed that one:
Why did she have to make the decision to begin with?
Polls consistently show support for the death penalty.
President Bush supports it, having executed a record
number of inmates as the governor of Texas and having
ordered the first two executions by the federal
government in over 35 years.
But how strong is support for capital punishment?
The Practice framed the issue around the morality of
executing an insane person. Most people, I feel
reasonably certain, oppose such a practice.
Last year, the Supreme Court decided against putting
mentally retarded individuals to death. Again, I believe
this point of view prevails among the public.
The same court has struggled over whether people not
those who were not adults at the time of their capital
offense should be subject to execution. Though
sentiment against this practice does not match that of
the other categories, I think most people oppose the
execution of those who were minors at the time of their
crimes.
When we take away the death row inmates who are not
mentally ill, mentally retarded or adults, who does that
leave? Cynics might say it leaves a bunch of people who
falsely claim their innocence.
But how certain can we be that a given inmate actually
committed the crime?
A jury may convict a person based on eyewitness
testimony. However, many eyewitnesses have poor
memories, tell prosecutors what they want to hear or
give false testimony.
A jury may convict a person based on a confession. But
many suspects, mentally troubled, falsely confess.
Others suffer coercion from zealous police officers.
A jury may convict based on fingerprints or blood
spatter. Unfortunately, these factors do not have
a "time stamp" on them and can cause prosecutors to jump
to errant conclusions.
In Illinois, outgoing Governor George Ryan recently
commuted the death sentences of many on death row there
and freed some others, acknowledging doubts about their
innocence. Since we cannot be sure of the true
innocence of many of our death row inmates, other states
may follow suit.
Capital punishment simply brings with it a margin of
error too narrow for humans to satisfy. It's no wonder
a person would go crazy trying to avoid it.