skip to nav

Life without parole - a fate worse than the death penalty

New Mexico is the latest US State to abolish the death penalty, but instead convicts are being locked away until they die, a fate that leaves them with far less chance of commutation

FIRST POSTED APRIL 9, 2009

I am the resurrection and the life," Jesus assured Martha, adding that though her brother Lazarus was dead these four days in the tomb, "yet shall he live." So, according to St John's Gospel, it came to pass. "He that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go."

On March 18 Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico, had his opportunity to raise the dead and bring them back to life. This was the day he signed a law, already ratified by the State Senate and House, formally ending New Mexico's death penalty.

Did Richardson ennoble this solemn occasion by endorsing the idea that all human life has value, and even those who have fallen into the lowest moral abyss are capable of redemption? Did he cite Holy Scripture as buttress for such thoughts? He did not.

Richardson festooned the signing with language about this being the "most difficult decision" of his political life, arrived at only after he had toured the maximum-security unit where offenders sentenced to life without parole would be held. "My conclusion was those cells are something that may be worse than death," he said. "I believe this is a just punishment."

Abolitionists have fled the battleground where Revenge tilts against RedemptionLest anyone be under the misapprehension that the governor was endorsing some quaint notion that all human life has value, Richardson was at pains to emphasise that since the new law comes into force only on July 1, the two condemned men currently residing on Death Row in New Mexico still face execution.

For Richardson the flaw with the death penalty lies in its imperfection. "Faced with the reality that our system for imposing the death penalty can never be perfect, my conscience compels me to replace the death penalty with a solution that keeps society safe." Embalmed in this self-serving verbiage are many pointers to how seriously the whole cause of death-penalty abolition has gone off the rails, fleeing the arduous moral battleground where Revenge tilts against Redemption for the low-lying pastures of Efficiency.

With the death penalty, irreversible mistakes bring the whole justice system into well-deserved disrepute. But of course the state has a ready answer, one conveniently cued for them by the abolitionists who have set the stage for the state to offer its substitute: life without the possibility of parole (LWOP)—living death or, in Richardson's creepy phrase, something "worse than death".

Also recruited into the abolitionists' arguments for efficiency have been pragmatic calculations that the death penalty is simply too expensive. It costs a ton of money, particularly in a state like California, to fight a death penalty case through the courts and the appeals process, pay for prosecutors and defenders to amass the data and the witnesses for the post-verdict penalty phases of the trial, get someone onto death row in San Quentin and then fight further endless battles over habeas corpus writs, stays of execution and so forth.

Bill Clinton did his best to speed up the conveyor belt by signing the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. But it's still a hugely expensive hassle to line things up so lethal injection can proceed. Against all this, what's brisker than the offer of LWOP as 

Next

Filed under: Prison, America, Civil liberties, Civil Rights, Death penalty, New Mexico, Bill Richardson, Alexander Cockburn, Jail

Add to:

Comments

Hide comments

Thank you for a noble and compassionate plea for the deliberately forgotten. Oscar Wilde, in his marvellous and neglected De Profundis, wrote: "Society takes upon itself the right to inflict appalling punishment on the individual, but it also has the supreme vice of shallowness, and fails to realise what it has done. When the man's punishment is over, it leaves him to himself; that is to say, it abandons him at the very moment when its highest duty towards him begins. It is really ashamed of its own actions, and shuns those whom it has punished, as people shun a creditor whose debt they cannot pay, or one on whom they have inflicted an irreparable, an irremediable wrong. I can claim on my side that if I realise what I have suffered, society should realise what it has inflicted on me; and that there should be no bitterness or hate on either side."

Posted by paul chandler at 9:40pm on April 9, 2009

I rarely agree with Mr. Cockburn, but in this instance most definitely do.

Posted by jsigler@prpgrp.com at 1:13pm on April 10, 2009

Add comment

You must be signed into your user account to add a comment.

  Forgotten password?
 
  or create an account

sign up for the daily email

News & Comment: News & Politics