Capital punishment and the common good?
By Lynne Bell
Once again, I am to write about and defend one of those uncomfortable topics which I've been lucky enough to escape thus far in my life. This week, I am to defend the necessity of capital punishment, which is currently a moot point, because in Canada, it no longer exists as a sentencing option.
Like most people, I have reservations about capital punishment. Our legal system is rooted in the fairness of common law and the Canadian constitution, but it is, of course, not perfect. Even in Saskatchewan, an innocent man served time in prison for a murder he did not commit. In the United States-where in some states capital punishment is still administered-the innocent have been wrongly convicted and have paid the ultimate price. In other cases, prisoners have suffered painful, undignified deaths instead of clean, clinically-supervised executions as the mechanisms of legally-sanctioned death have gone terribly wrong.
While I researched this difficult question, I encountered an argument in favour of capital punishment-by-of all people- the late British author and Christian philosopher, C.S. Lewis, who, if you're familiar with children's lit, also wrote 'The Chronicles of Narnia.'
Instead of calling for fire and brimstone to rain down upon the heads of unrepentant killers, Lewis thoughtfully argued in his essay, “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment” that capital punishment was the only way to not only balance the scales of earthly and heavenly justice; but it was also necessary to preserve the dignity of humankind.
Lewis argued that if a guilty person is not punished proportionately for their crime-however heinous that offence may be-then it is they who are stripped of their human dignity. His view was that if a genuinely guilty person used a defense that stated they were anything but a free moral agent, responsible for their actions, they, along with society, were avoiding the uncomfortable task of meting out justice. That is, the murderer was actually demeaning themselves by presenting themselves as less than a thinking, intelligent human, who was capable of taking responsibility for their actions.
As a Christian, Lewis wrote: “To be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we 'ought to have known better,' is to be treated as a human person made in God's image.” Paradoxically, this meant that by deeming the ultimate punishment a necessity, Lewis was not only respecting the lives of victims of murder, but also the lives of murderers.
Lewis also stated that if mercy was extended to “offenders whose guilt was certain” but was ignored by society, then the lack of appropriate punishment would eventually create “a moral travesty, which over time, helps pave the way for collapse of the entire social order.”
Or: Do we as citizens have the right to show mercy where justice is not satisfied?
Even though anyone called to jury duty here in Canada won't have to consider the death penalty for any defendant anytime soon, we are not immune to the actions of those whose rampant disrespect for human life and dignity are both shocking and repellent. In Canada, we have our own homegrown killers, and in some parts of the world, barbarity and bloodshed are increasing at an alarming rate. Modern technology doesn't halt murder and mayhem. Instead, it is broadcast to a massive global audience.
C.S. Lewis would have been well aware that the idea of state-sponsored execution is in direct opposition to the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” However, by arguing that capital punishment is an appropriate and just response to some cases of murder, he is asking us to consider what justice really is, and whether capital punishment can be an essential element of that same justice.
The justice system can fail and death is final
By Kelly Running
It’s a debate that has surfaced time and time again, should the death penalty be a punishment available through the judicial system for heinous crimes such as first degree murder?
In Canada the death penalty was abolished in 1976, although the last execution in Canadian history occurred on Dec. 11, 1962, when two individuals were hanged for murder. During the 60s death sentences were in fact being commuted and it was tied into the Diefenbaker government enacting the Canadian Bill of Rights, which brought forth different degrees of murder within the Criminal Code distinguishing between premeditated murder to accidental death.
When Lester B. Pearson became Prime Minister and passed legislation in 1967 suspending the death penalty before it was completely eliminated under Pierre Trudeau.
The death penalty no longer suits what has become our beliefs of the penal system, which is rehabilitation and reintegration, however, the main argument against the death penalty is what I will argue here. What if the individual was wrongly convicted?
The judicial system is not perfect and if someone was wrongly convicted there is no coming back from that.
One of the most famous true stories in Canada, I remember reading about him in school, is of Steven Truscott. At the age of 14, Truscott was sentenced in 1959 to the death penalty for the rape and murder of 12-year-old Lynne Harper. Truscott was the last person to see her, two days before her body was discovered, after giving her a lift on his bicycle.
The young boy was sentenced to be hanged, after a short two-week trial, on Dec. 8, 1959, but it was postponed to Feb. 16, 1960. On Jan. 22, a mere 25 days before his death was scheduled his sentence was commuted to life in prison.
Throughout the years Truscott maintained his innocence. He was a model prisoner, released on parole in 1969 and in 1974 his parole restrictions were lifted.
Since Truscott’s death sentence was commuted he lived long enough to prove his innocence through appealing his case. Since the case in 1959 was wholly circumstantial and focused on Harper’s death being within a very specific timeline implicating Truscott could have done it. In fact it was an extremely precise time that modern scientists would be hesitant to state; the pathologist in 1959 said she died between 7p.m. and 7:45p.m. Through more advanced science in the 2000s and the exhumation of Harper’s body Truscott was acquitted, with the Attorney General of Ontario apologizing to Truscott for a miscarriage of justice.
Although in the court of public opinion people are still split on the Truscott case, there are other cases which even hit closer to home. David Milgaard, 16-years-old at the time was travelling across the country with friends in1969. He was implicated in the murder of a 20-year-old nursing student, Gail Miller, in Saskatoon.
It was Albert Cadrain, one of Milgaard’s friends that, after returning from the trip to B.C., contacted police saying Milgaard was acting strangely and had blood on his clothes the morning after Miller was killed. Lengthy interrogations brought out information from his other friends also pointing to Milgaard as the murderer.
For 23 years he maintained his innocence in prison. Although he wasn’t sentenced to the death penalty this is a case that would have put an innocent man to death. His time in prison, however, did lead to several suicide attempts as he was both physically and sexually assaulted.
However, Larry Fisher, a serial rapist living in Cadrain’s basement was the actual culprit. As Milgaard meagrely survived in jail, Fisher was in and out of the prison system for sexual assaults, rape, and attempted murder. It wasn’t until Aug. 28, 1980, when Linda, Fisher’s ex-wife, brought forth her suspicions about Miller, something the police had already began to suspect.
In 1988 the crown entered a “stay of proceedings,” but Milgaard and his mother fought for exoneration and in 1997 DNA testing confirmed that the semen found on Miller’s clothing was that of Fisher’s, not Milgaard’s.
An innocent man who, had he been given the death sentence, would have lost his life.
