Let me be clear and unequivocal in stating that I support State Attorney Ayala and her position on the death penalty. While reasonable people can debate her approach, it is undeniable that her stance is bold and courageous. I also believe the governor’s actions recusing her of our authority violate the Florida constitution. Further, I question to what degree does State Attorney Ayala’s race and gender factor into his decision to usurp her authority. That said, addressing those legal issues are not why I have decided to join the discussion.
For me, a nagging question that I keep asking myself is why are people so committed to the death penalty? What relief does the death penalty provide that other forms of punishment fall short? It is not simply an economical benefit because it cost far more to place someone on death row than to give them a life sentence.[1] Likewise, the reason cannot be that it brings closure because it is a very lengthy process. [2] Many prisoners are not executed but end up with a de facto life sentence. Moreover, there is no substantial evidence indicating that it deters crime.[3] So again, I am drawn back to the question of why death?
I do not claim to have found the answer, but in my contemplation I have found possible reasons. To begin, there is a book called The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz. In the book it list four major principles to live by. One of which is that we should not take anything personally. No matter what anyone says are does to you, do not take it personal. How a person interacts or responds to you is more about them than it is about you. I would suggest that this principle holds true when considering the death penalty. Our society’s overwhelming support of the death penalty is more about us than about the victim or the perpetrator. What we seek out of death, therefore, is not necessarily a universal sense of justice, although that may be a part of it. Rather, I believe our thirst for death partially results from a belief that it brings about a perceived personal benefit. The question now becomes, what is that perceived benefit.
In uncovering that answer, I was drawn to an article I read while a law student that looked at the role of religion in the history of the death penalty. It was by Mark Fearnow and entitled Theatre for an Angry God.[4] As a person who is fascinated by the intersection between race, law and religion, I found the article insightful and fascinating. I used it as the basis of a paper I wrote, and I have woven portions of that paper into this post because I believe it helps us understand the “why the death penalty” question.
Prior to religious reasons dominating the discussion on capital punishment, murder was seen as a matter between the family of the victim and the alleged perpetrator. This was certainly the case for early Greeks, for instance. [5] Religion, however, altered this paradigm by presenting the idea of souls[6], supernatural and transcendent forces within mankind, connecting us to god or the gods. Furthermore, the soul was seen as the force dictating our behavior and thus was truly the target of punishment. Therefore, addressing crime was not solely a matter between individuals, but between individuals and the gods. Solving the issue was not just for the sake of rectifying harm committed to an individual, but was seen as correcting a transgression committed against the gods. The need for purification, thus, was great because societies feared the presence of certain criminals “in a community could draw the anger of the gods on the whole community and the state had therefore to intervene in the interests of justice.”[7]
In the article Fearnow explains how when societies are faced with unexplained disasters, natural or manmade, historically they assumed this was caused by unpunished sin wrecking havoc on the community.[8] Therefore, the community had to purify itself of this sin, and one form of purification was human sacrifice. Deciding the qualifiers for human sacrifice, created what Fearnow termed the “sacrificeables.” Throughout diverse cultures in time, one common characteristic of the “sacrificeables” has been their marginality. “They are individuals who because of some mark of race or status are ‘incapable of establishing or sharing the social bonds that link the rest of the inhabitants.’”[9] Yet, these individuals could not be total strangers to the community because then they would not qualify as suitable sacrifices. They must have some relations to the community in order to function as a vessel for the whole group’s impurities.[10]
Not only are the “sacrificeables” seen as suitable substitutes, the dominant group also project onto them the belief that they have powers that can menace the community, even though these powers may lie dormant for years. However, as soon as anything goes wrong in the community, these alleged powers become real in the minds of the dominant group, they blame the marginalized member and demand their life.[11] In this way, the death penalty for the dominant group is a matter of self-defense against a menacing force in their community.[12] Also, watching the public executions was an act of solidarity for the white Protestant members of society, and thus reaffirmed its power and confidence.[13] This was certainly the case during the lynching of blacks, particularly after the South lost the war and tried to make sense of the devastation it just faced.
To be sure, I do not mean to suggest that these sentiments were felt on a conscious level or function currently on a conscious level. I doubt greatly that people are conscious of these beliefs. “In the conscious minds of the members of the privileged community, the killing is just a necessary execution.”[14] Although religious rationales are no longer explicit, they linger in the backdrop in the discussion on the death penalty. Also, I am not suggesting that these religious sentiments resulted from honest or accurate adherence to one’s faith. In many instances, like lynching, I believe it was the perversion or ignorance of one’s faith that caused this subconscious belief.
At any rate, I believe part of the reason behind the inequality we see in the administration of the death penalty ties into this subconscious desire of the dominant group to purify itself of a perceived threat of violence from marginalized members of society. This, in part, is the spirit behind the death penalty. It allows for the dominant group to perform their ritual of asserting power and dominance over marginalized groups, while also affirming their solidarity and security.
The death penalty, then, has less to do with justice and more to do with power and dominance. Therefore, to remove the death penalty is not simply a matter of reducing the available methods of punishment, but rather it diminishes the sense of power held by the dominant group. This is not sufficient cause to continue to perpetuate a form of punishment that is meted out unequally and is costly. We must establish a better system of justice that is not driven by fear, but truly run by a sense of justice.
Until Next Time
–Palooke–
[1] See Amnesty International, Death Penalty Cost. Available at < http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost>
[2] See Bureau of Justice Statistics Capital Punishment, 2013 Statistical Tables, Table 15. Available at <https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp13st.pdf>. Average time spent on death row greater than 10 years.
[3] See Amnesty International, The Death Penalty and Deterrence . Available at <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/the-death-penalty-and-deterrence>
[4] Mark Fearnow, Theatre for an Angry God: Public Burnings and Hangings in Colonial New York 1741, 40 The MIT Press 15, (Summer 1996). This idea of purge and sanctifying is taken largely from Faearnow’s discussion on “sacrifice-for-purification”, and is the basis for my larger thesis.
[5] Id at 4.
[6] Id.
[7] Id. See also Fearnow, supra 2, at 24-25, Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell, WHO OWNS DEATH? 20-21 (2000 HarperCollins). Also, because the need to prevent the wrath of god was great, executions were often conducted in a very public manner with death parades where the condemned would walk the long distance to his death in the public forum.
[8] See e.g. 1 Samuel 14; Numbers 21:4-8.
[9] Id. at 25
[10] Id. at 25
[11] Id. at 25.
[12] Id. at 25.
[13] Id at 28.
[14] Id. at 26-28.
