yeaton.net

December 13, 2005

Tookie Williams - Atonement and Redemption

As expected, the State of California executed Tookie Williams last night. I opposed this in a previous post, not because I believe he is innocent, or that good works cancel out bad deeds. What struck me today was the excerpt from Governor Schwarzenegger's denial:

"Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings, there can be no redemption."

This is the language of God and not politics. We should separate such men from society for the rest of their lives, but it is not our place to judge atonement and redemption. Leave that to God.

Posted by Michael at 02:20 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 23, 2005

Tookie Williams Should Live

The countdown is on for the execution of Tookie Williams. It's an awful question: what to do with a man convicted of killing four people with no motive other than mayhem, but who has subsequently renounced violence and dedicated himself to helping young people stay out of gangs? I've listened to the arguments back and forth, but I believe they're flawed on both sides.

One one side some very famous folks (Mike Farrell, Jesse Jackson, Bianca Jagger, etc.) are making the claim that his good works in prison merit clemency. The families of the victims are understandably incensed by this argument - what good works might his victims have done if there lives had not been cut short? Do we setup some kind of points system to measure redemption - so many merit badges to earn a stay?

Yet, the arguments on the other side fail to move me as well. They talk about the message it sends to others, but studies show that punishment must be swift and certain to be an effective deterrent; the death penalty is neither. From an economic standpoint, these cases end up costing the state far more than lifetime incarceration. Finally, there's the troubling fact that more than a hundred death row inmates have later been exonerated.

So the real argument comes down to justice: is it right to end this man's life because he ended four others? If he is no threat to others now (and nobody suggests he is) then I say no; not because of his redemptive works (admirable but irrelevant) but because we are imperfect vehicles of justice.

"Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written 'Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,' says the Lord." (Romans 12:20, Deuteronomy 32:35)