Rumors of the Demise of the Death Penalty Are Greatly Exaggerated.
In Spring 2002, I was meeting with a number of young men sentenced to death awaiting their fate in the state prison located in Livingston, Texas. While waiting for guards to transport my next client, a young man wearing the prison-issued, white jump-suit with the large, unmistakable “DR” (death row) on the back waved me over to ask me a question. “Do you think the United States Supreme Court will prevent the execution of juveniles this term? I heard that they were going to let Napoleon Beazley die because his case is too political, but then they were going to take a case right after he’s killed.” I told him that I hoped they would take a case--any case--immediately. “I hope so, too. I was only 17 when I was convicted of murder. Your guy is here. Thanks for talking to me. My name is Toronto Patterson.”
Next Term, the United States Supreme Court accepted Christopher Simmons’ case and later held that the U.S. Constitution prohibited the execution of juveniles.
For some time now and from various sources (politicians, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and fellow abolitionists), I have heard that we have achieved a de facto abolition of the death penalty in Washington. I hope so, but for the sake of eight men currently living in Walla Walla under a sentence of death, I do not believe we can rest so easy.
There are, of course, reasons to be optimistic. No new person has been sentenced to death since 2000. The state penitentiary has not carried out an execution since James Elledge volunteered in 2001--and it has been since 1984 when the last person who did not volunteer for a death sentence (Charles Campbell) was hung in our names.
However, there are danger signals. After the 9th Circuit vacated Cal Brown’s death sentence, the United States Supreme Court reversed that decision and reinstated death—one of several cases coming out of the 9th Circuit where the increasingly conservative Supreme Court took the lower appellate court to task for being too liberal. It seems to have worked. Just last week, the 9th Circuit found no error with Darold Stenson’s trial or death sentence. Trust me, there were many worthy errors to choose from.
After the Washington Supreme Court narrowly affirmed Davya Cross’ death sentence in 2006, last week they affirmed Robert Yates’ by an 8-1 margin. What’s most concerning is that the four justices who in Cross’ case argued that the death penalty was arbitrary, capricious, and broken appear to have given up the fight.
Despite control of both the legislative and executive branches in Olympia, very few officials in Olympia have the courage to speak of abolition—not when we issues like the future of the viaduct and the Sonics command attention.
At the end of the day, we know that rumors of the death penalty’s demise mean nothing. We cannot wait and hope that the arbitrariness which defines the death penalty continues to work in our favor. Because sometimes it does not. I’d tell you to ask Napoleon or Toronto, but you can’t. They are dead.
In Spring 2002, I was meeting with a number of young men sentenced to death awaiting their fate in the state prison located in Livingston, Texas. While waiting for guards to transport my next client, a young man wearing the prison-issued, white jump-suit with the large, unmistakable “DR” (death row) on the back waved me over to ask me a question. “Do you think the United States Supreme Court will prevent the execution of juveniles this term? I heard that they were going to let Napoleon Beazley die because his case is too political, but then they were going to take a case right after he’s killed.” I told him that I hoped they would take a case--any case--immediately. “I hope so, too. I was only 17 when I was convicted of murder. Your guy is here. Thanks for talking to me. My name is Toronto Patterson.”
Next Term, the United States Supreme Court accepted Christopher Simmons’ case and later held that the U.S. Constitution prohibited the execution of juveniles.
For some time now and from various sources (politicians, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and fellow abolitionists), I have heard that we have achieved a de facto abolition of the death penalty in Washington. I hope so, but for the sake of eight men currently living in Walla Walla under a sentence of death, I do not believe we can rest so easy.
There are, of course, reasons to be optimistic. No new person has been sentenced to death since 2000. The state penitentiary has not carried out an execution since James Elledge volunteered in 2001--and it has been since 1984 when the last person who did not volunteer for a death sentence (Charles Campbell) was hung in our names.
However, there are danger signals. After the 9th Circuit vacated Cal Brown’s death sentence, the United States Supreme Court reversed that decision and reinstated death—one of several cases coming out of the 9th Circuit where the increasingly conservative Supreme Court took the lower appellate court to task for being too liberal. It seems to have worked. Just last week, the 9th Circuit found no error with Darold Stenson’s trial or death sentence. Trust me, there were many worthy errors to choose from.
After the Washington Supreme Court narrowly affirmed Davya Cross’ death sentence in 2006, last week they affirmed Robert Yates’ by an 8-1 margin. What’s most concerning is that the four justices who in Cross’ case argued that the death penalty was arbitrary, capricious, and broken appear to have given up the fight.
Despite control of both the legislative and executive branches in Olympia, very few officials in Olympia have the courage to speak of abolition—not when we issues like the future of the viaduct and the Sonics command attention.
At the end of the day, we know that rumors of the death penalty’s demise mean nothing. We cannot wait and hope that the arbitrariness which defines the death penalty continues to work in our favor. Because sometimes it does not. I’d tell you to ask Napoleon or Toronto, but you can’t. They are dead.
