I have not written before about the execution of Stanley "Tookie" Williams because I have always been ambivalent about the death penalty and didn't know much about the particular case. I have read a fair amount in the blogosphere, in the New York Times today, and heard some, perhaps unintentionally, revealing reports from reporter/witnesses on NPR this morning. There are a few things that stand out about this case.
First, the facts as presented suggest that if the death penalty is ever warranted, it was surely deserved by this man. He murdered four innocent people in cold blood and established a gang of terrorists (to use Baldilocks elocution) who have been involved in untold suffering to their community.
Here is his lawyer's description of the clemency request for Stanley Williams:
"Our petition for clemency was based on Stanley Williams's personal redemption, his good works and positive impact that those works have had on thousands and thousands of kids across this country and on Williams's ability to continue to do those good works going forward," Jonathan Harris, one of his lawyers, said at a news conference in Sacramento on Monday.
I would suggest that, even without knowing exactly what occurred within Williams's heart and mind, the subject of redemption is misguided.
According to dictionary.com, redemption has 5 possible meanings:
1. The act of redeeming or the condition of having been redeemed.
2. Recovery of something pawned or mortgaged.
3. The payment of an obligation, as a government's payment of the value of its bonds.
4. Deliverance upon payment of ransom; rescue.
5. Christianity. Salvation from sin through Jesus's sacrifice.
Definitions 2, 3, and 4 seem not to apply, except metaphorically, which leaves 1 and 5. The last definition would pertain to Williams' relationship with his creator and is not germane to the discussion of his fate in this, secular, world. To those who believe, he is now in possession of concrete proof of his redemption or lack thereof. Which brings us back to the first definition.
To atone for one's transgressions requires more than a private conversation between oneself and one's deity; it requires paying back the debt one has incurred by one's actions. Williams could never repay the debt to the families of his victims; his only hope lay in begging their forgiveness. At no time, however, did Williams ever beg forgiveness from the families who were ravaged by his heinous actions. He always tried to have it both ways; denying guilt, yet insisting he had atoned. This is inconsistent to say the least. I find it profoundly troubling that he never once seemed to offer much evidence that he cared about the victims, whose lives were taken from them.
It seems to me that if one who had committed such heinous crimes had truly repented and sought forgiveness, if they had truly recognized the enormity of their crime, they would be left with no choice but to forfeit any claim they might have on their own life and offer their life into the hands of those they had so egregiously injured. Williams never did this, never gave evidence of concern for his victims, but certainly cared about himself.
It is perhaps even more troubling that all those who came to oppose the execution on the supposed basis of moral and ethical grounds became complicit in denying the humanity of Williams victims. It is no surprise, but deplorable nonetheless, that such luminaries as Jesse Jackson, could not even recall (if they ever cared to know) the names of any of the victims.
Wretchard persuasively pointed out this morning that the opposition to his execution was actually on political grounds, rather than moral or ethical grounds (though couched in such language.) This makes more comprehensible the fact that seemed to slip into the NPR report on his death this morning, that I have not seen mentioned anywhere else. Apparently, as he was lying on the table waiting for the needle to be inserted, Williams kept glancing over to his 3 (or 5, reports are unclear) supporters; they mouthed their support to him, blew kisses, and continually offered the "Black Power" salute, which would seem out of place on such an occasion. The Black Power salute, whatever the intentions of its current practitioners, came from the street thugs and gangs (Black Panthers) who used it, as usual aided and abetted by that part of the media that finds "authenticity" in violence and thus lends its skilled use of language to detoxify the facts, to intimidate and gain privileged immunity from the "white, racist, power structure" of the society whose rules they disdained.
Since these supporters were chosen by Williams, it is fair to say that their gestures reflected his convictions; it is hardly evidence of redemption. It is also a sad sign that Stanley Williams, at the end of his life, lost whatever remained of his humanity to those who would use him for their political and personal agenda.
Recent Comments