IS
THERE HOPE AT THE END OF THE RAINBOW?
A
Review of Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr. and Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. on the
Death Penalty
By
RUSSELL D. COVEY
Jan.
18
Rev.
Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., Representative Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., Bruce Shapiro,
Legal Lynching: The Death Penalty and America's Future (The New Press:
2001)
Recent
events have proved that coalitions of nations can make for successful wars
against Middle Eastern tyrants; coalitions of states can make for
successful antitrust actions against megalithic monopolists; and coalitions
of warlords may even make for successful interim government in
moderation-starved post-Taliban Afghanistan. But as Legal Lynching: The
Death Penalty and America's Future makes plain, books authored by coalition
do not make for very satisfying reading.
The
book's dust-jacket reveals that Legal Lynching is the handiwork not only of
the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., and his son, Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., but
also of Nation contributor Bruce Shapiro. Moreover, the acknowledgements
indicate that additional assistance was provided by Representative Jackson's
congressional staff and the staff of the Rainbow/PUSH organization, among
others. Legal Lynching thus appears to be the quintessential literary group
effort.
At
the heart of the book is the authors' contention that "death penalty
opponents now have an opportunity to build a true majority to end the
American capital punishment nightmare." As a handbook for activists
pursuing that cause, Legal Lynching may prove moderately useful. It
compiles the arguments against the death penalty in easily digestible form,
while supplying a human face to many of them, and it leavens its policy
rhetoric with occasional sprinklings of history, theory, and theology. But
as a personal reflection on one of the most divisive moral and political
issues of our day, co-authored by a leading religious statesman, the book
fails.
A
List of Familiar Anti-Death Penalty Arguments
The
book - actually, hard-cover pamphlet would be a more accurate description -
trots out familiar arguments against the death penalty. They are
indisputably true, but their compilation here is unlikely to change any
death penalty proponent's mind.
Familiar
or not, the bill of particulars against the death penalty makes for
unsettling reading: Innocent persons die each year in the state's
accelerating rush to execution. The death-penalty system is corrupted by
incompetent, underpaid defense attorneys who sleep or booze their way
through trials. Over-ambitious prosecutors look at executions as another
notch on their belts. Defendants are convicted and sentenced to death on
the basis of flimsy evidence, jailhouse confessions, and unreliable
eyewitness identifications. Rights of appeal are ever more restricted, and
there is decreasing hope that the Supreme Court's hardened heart will
soften in the face of death-row inmates' last minute pleas, despite the
fact that documented racism infects the decision-making process at every
level in the system.
Putting
A Human Face On Death
What
the book lacks in freshness is, in part, made up for with several real-life
stories that bring life to the rhetoric.
The
authors tell the story, for instance, of George McFarland, sentenced to
death by a Texas jury just four days after opening statements in his trial
were made, whose defense attorney slept throughout the proceedings.
According to newspaper accounts, when asked if he truly had fallen asleep
during his client's capital trial, McFarland's lawyer replied: "It's
boring." Despite his mockery of a trial, McFarland attempts at appeal
have proved unavailing.
They
also tell the story of Brian Baldwin, a 17-year old boy charged with the
1977 rape and murder of 16-year old Naomi Rolon, who met with his defense
attorney for all of 20 minutes prior to a one-and-one-half day trial. The
jury that sentenced Baldwin to die never learned that his "confession"
was elicited with the help of beatings and a cattle prod. Neither did the
jury learn that bloodstained clothes were found belonging to Edmund Horsley,
Baldwin's co-defendant and principal accuser, but Baldwin's own clothes
tested negative for blood. Indeed, not even a subsequent signed confession
from Horsley and a brief filed by 33 prosecutors and judges on Baldwin's
behalf, could save Baldwin from the electric chair.
The
authors provide an interesting challenge to victim rights advocates by
pointing to murder-victim survivors such as Bud Welch, whose daughter was
killed in the Oklahoma City bombing. Welch opposed imposition of the death
penalty on confessed bomber Timothy McVeigh because he felt that "God
only knows there's been enough bloodshed," but prosecutors refused to
allow him to testify. The authors argue that the views of victims like
Welch, who oppose the death penalty, are discounted and ignored by
prosecutors seeking to advance their own agendas.
In
the end, perhaps the hero of the story is Illinois Governor George Ryan,
who, unsettled by DNA tests vindicating death row inmates, in January 2000
unilaterally imposed a moratorium in Illinois on executions pending a
review of that state's death penalty procedures. Using the Illinois
moratorium as a model, the authors conclude with a call for passage of a
bill co-sponsored by Representative Jackson imposing a moratorium on all
federal executions, and urging other states to follow suit. (The text of
the bill is "conveniently" reprinted in the final 20 pages of
this slim volume.)
Rhetoric
But No Soul
The
debating points are handily recounted, but the implicit promise of the
book--that the authors might provide a more personal, heartfelt account of
their opposition to the death penalty, perhaps drawing on Reverend Jackson's
relationships with religious leaders worldwide, is not kept.
For
instance, despite a chapter devoted to "Faith and the Death
Penalty," nowhere does Reverend Jackson provide any insight into the
enduring appeal of the death penalty among the members of the religious
right. None of the authors feels the need to share with the reader any
personal soul-searching - perhaps because the authors' anti-death penalty
views are not surprising, or perhaps because the book was drafted by too
many political staffers with too little to do between elections.
While
proclaiming the argument open-and-shut, the authors do concede that "it
remains a large challenge to convince church members and the general public
of the moral, social, and economic bankruptcy of continuing to pursue a
death-penalty policy." But for those who cling to a literal reading of
the biblical injunction to take "an eye for an eye," they do less
convincing, themselves, than they ideally might have, in the course of
Legal Lynching.
Although the authors' arguments no doubt will ring
true to those who already oppose the death penalty, about as many minds are
likely to be changed by this book as there are Southern States that will
suspend executions in deference to Representative Jackson's urgings.
Nonetheless, the authors have thrown their hat into the death penalty ring.
That counts for something..
|