Oct. 30


NEW YORK:

The anti-executioner's song----Play tackles death penalty Steve Earle's
Karla part of his campaign for its abolition


There have been 987 executions in the United States since the death
penalty was reinstated in 1976. Each has been one too many for Steve
Earle.

He wears many hats. In the years since his release from jail and drug
rehab, he has been voluble as an artist - six acclaimed albums, a short
story collection, even haikus - and as a death-penalty abolitionist. The 2
personae merge in Karla, which he calls his "old-fashioned, 95-minute,
1-act play" about the first woman executed in Texas since the Civil War.

We are having coffee off-Broadway, a block from the New York apartment
Earle shares with new wife, Alison Moorer. "I badly needed, after the last
election, to walk out my front door and see a same-sex mixed-race couple
walking down the street holding hands, it just makes me feel more secure.
And I'm not gonna see that in Nashville, Tennessee."

We are a block from 45 Bleecker, the lower Manhattan outpost of theatre
engage where Karla opened its limited run last weekend.

"The play opens with her execution," Earle says, "and everybody in it's
dead."

It follows Karla Faye Tucker - a double murderer who found God while
awaiting execution - into the afterlife, where she encounters, among
others, her victims.

It is, first and foremost, a play.

"It is artistically motivated. I'm opposed to the death penalty, but the
play isn't my diatribe." Nonetheless, the larger goal is to eradicate
execution in the U.S., and "I do believe music and different forms of art
can do that better than rhetoric."

Earle never met Tucker, so memorably mocked by then-Texas governor George
W. Bush, whose office presided over 152 executions during his tenure
(there have been 550 executions in the country since hers).

Earle did, however, have a scarring personal experience in the
death-house.

On Oct. 7, 1998, Earle was in the witness room in Huntsville, Tex., during
the lethal injection of Jonathan Nobles. There was no saying "no."

"I didn't get a chance to - it was a dying man's last request. Believe me,
I've prepared myself for saying 'no' since - I don't even put myself in a
position to be asked anymore. I don't get as close to inmates as I used
to."

Watching what he believes to be state-sponsored murder shook him to his
foundations. "Yeah, it still ... it still is. It was in 1998. Jon was
executed a few months after Karla was. And a lot of that experience drove
this play.

"My opposition to the death penalty doesn't have anything to do with
saving anybody on death row. Most people don't know anybody on death row.
Well, I did."

Earle came to know 11 inmates. "And none of my guys were innocent. Jon was
guilty of a particularly horrific crime, the kind you can't mitigate. He
was what, on one hand, they created the death penalty for. It's about
revenge; it's not about deterrence."

When Nobles made his request,

Earle turned for guidance to Sister Helen Prejean, immortalized by Susan
Sarandon in the film Dead Man Walking. "(She) says that support for the
death penalty in this country is a mile wide, but it's only an inch deep."

Meaning education is the answer to filling in an ignorance-founded belief
that is not deeply held by a majority of Americans. The Death Penalty
Information Centre and the ACLU are storehouses of activist information on
the issue. They lay bare what they contend are the biases of race and
class that poison a flawed system.

In a system whose best lawyers are its most expensive, the poor are
assigned public defenders whose skills might be in question.

So don't be poor and guilty. And don't kill a white person. One study in
California found that although blacks and Hispanics were more likely to be
slain, murderers of whites were three times more likely to draw a death
sentence.

In a study in Philadelphia submitted to the Cornell Law Review in 1998, a
black defendant/non-black victim combination was found to be the most
likely to result in a death sentence.

Deterrence is a non-starter. The murder rate in the U.S. dropped in 2004
by 3.3 %, declining to 5.5 murders per 100,000 people, even as use of the
death penalty dropped. Northeastern states account for 1 % of executions
and have a lower regional murder rate (4.2 %) than the south (6.6 %),
which accounts for 80 % of executions.

Then there are the mistakes. Earle rises in his seat as he emphasizes that
there is no way to know with certainty if the person being executed is
innocent. "My opposition to the death penalty isn't about saving anybody
on death row," he says. "It's about keeping me from going to hell."

The ACLU concurs. It points out that 119 prisoners sentenced to death have
been exonerated since 1976, many by DNA evidence. Without it, those
convictions would have taken innocent men to their deaths.

In the face of facts like these, Earle says, "The death penalty will die
of natural causes."

Perhaps the issue is DNA, in a broader sense.

"We live in a society where the mistake-proof formula for making a film or
writing a book or play is: You have a guy, and he gets the shit kicked out
of him for the first 1/3. In the middle 1/3, he goes out and gets a bunch
of f***ing guns. And in the last third, he kills every-f***ing-body."

Karla is the opposite of that. "I think it's about forgiveness."

Earle, of course, experienced his own redemption.

The What-Makes-Stevie-Run question was answered in a solo performance
Earle gave 2 weeks ago in 45 Bleecker. After a ragged, jaunty number about
debauchery, he told the crowd he felt duty-bound to give the other side of
the story. His story. He played CCKMP (Cocaine Cannot Kill My Pain) from
the I Feel Alright album.

Many musicians drop into the drug underworld and sail that pirate ship
straight down the Styx. Not many come out of it and go on to produce six
of their best records along with writing haikus, short stories, half a
novel and a play. I point this out to Earle, and the fact that other
destructive artists - say, Courtney Love - are unlikely to rack up six
great albums after the hangover's gone.

"Yeah, she's gotta get one in a row," he says, but the topic is serious.

"Yeah, I coulda died. And if you die you die, and I didn't and I don't
know why.

"I happened to decide I wanted to live."

(source: The (Montreal) Gazette)






ALABAMA:

One who kills a child may deserve a life sentence


In May, I prosecuted Chris Wesson in the Bessemer Division of Jefferson
County. Wesson had been charged with the crime of capital murder in that
he intentionally caused the death of a child, 14-month-old Austin Terry.

On May 25, after 7? days of testimony, a jury was essentially told to
crawl into the head of Wesson and determine whether he intended to kill
Austin Terry when Wesson beat Austin on Nov. 2, 2002. The jury deliberated
eight days and found Wesson guilty of manslaughter instead of capital
murder. In other words, the jury concluded he recklessly, rather than
intentionally, caused Austin's death. Wesson was immediately sentenced by
Circuit Judge Dan King to 20 years, the maximum penalty allowed by law for
the crime of manslaughter, a Class-B felony.

This verdict was a complete mystery to me in light of the evidence
presented. During the trial, Wesson admitted that while he was hung over
from taking 2 Oxy Contins, Austin started pestering him. He admitted he
hit Austin once in the stomach and, after the baby stood up and swatted
back, Wesson hit Austin again in the head. While Wesson did admit he hit
Austin twice, he nevertheless minimized his actions toward Austin.

The autopsy showed that Austin died of a bilateral subdural hematoma to
the brain. He had 2 groupings of bruises consistent with the knuckle marks
on his abdomen and 5 of the same type of bruises all over his head. The
physical evidence proved that Austin was beaten far worse than Wesson
admitted.

I strongly disagreed with the jury's verdict. After 12 years as an
assistant district attorney, this was not the first time I disliked the
outcome of a case, and I am confident it won't be the last. The difference
with this case, however, is that 11 out of 12 jurors also agreed with me.

In court after the foreman read the verdict, as I always try to do, I held
myself together. I tried to show no emotion. I left the courtroom without
speaking to any of the jurors. I did not want to hear what they had to
say. They were wrong. I soon found out they were a persistent group, and
nine of the 12 jurors came to my office refusing to leave until I spoke
with them. In the end, I relented and spoke with them in the law library
of the district attorney's office.

They told me there was one juror who could not believe a person could
intentionally kill a child. Even after numerous charges from the court
explaining that intent can be inferred from the circumstances surrounding
the event and/or the event itself, and the pleading by at least 10 of the
jurors for this man to deliberate with them, this one juror would not
budge. The 11 remaining jurors were concerned if a mistrial was declared,
another jury may somehow possibly let Wesson go. The 11 knew he was guilty
and did not want to chance it, so in the end, they changed their vote from
capital murder to manslaughter. Do I agree with their conclusion? No, but
I admire these jury members' commitment and the responsibility they took
on to see that Wesson did not walk.

After 2 hours of conversation with these amazing individuals, along with a
lot of tears and hugs, I left the library knowing we had to change the law
in Alabama. Twenty years was not enough time for what Wesson did to
Austin.

Now, 4 months from the verdict, a bill has been drafted and is soon to be
pre-filed for the next legislative session. State Rep. Paul DeMarco,
R-Homewood, will sponsor the bill in the House and seek to change the
penalty provisions of Alabama's manslaughter statute. The amendment would
make manslaughter a Class-A felony in cases involving the death of a child
under 14 years old. The range of punishment for a class A felony is 10
years to 99 years or life. This change will give judges the discretion to
order a sentence that reflects the facts of the crime committed.

I know there are child death cases that are truly manslaughter cases where
a certain degree of leniency may be justified. I have handled several over
the past decade. Then there are those cases such as Austin's (and Brittany
Crawford's) where there are numerous marks of a severe and brutal beating.
After one punch, maybe there is an argument for leniency. After three, 4
or 5 punches, several seconds have passed, thoughts are processed and the
reckless act changes to an intentional act. A judge must be able to punish
accordingly.

I will not bend in my opinion that repeatedly hitting a child in the head
or abdomen with blunt force, be it with a fist or a Coca-Cola bottle
filled with M&Ms, is an intentional act. It is not reckless conduct. When
the victims are helpless, defenseless children, the verdict should be
capital murder.

This law revision, however, will allow a judge to exercise discretion and
give an appropriate sentence when a jury finds that death by severe
beating is merely a reckless act. Austin's killer, by law, may not deserve
what Austin received. However, for this precious, blond-haired, blue-eyed
little boy's life, Wesson needed to at least serve a life sentence.

(source: Opinion, Birmingham News - Jill Ganus is a longtime assistant
district attorney in the Bessemer division of Jefferson County who
specializes in prosecuting cases where children are victims of physical
and sexual abuse)



Reply via email to