softheart
01-23-2005, 10:15 AM
This reporter hit the nail right on the head.
softie
January 23, 2005
Michele Jacklin, The Hartford Courant
At 2:01 a.m. on Wednesday, in the execution chamber at Osborn Correctional
Institution in Somers, a syringe containing a lethal dose of sodium
thiopental will be emptied into Michael Ross' left arm. If all goes well,
a few minutes later he will stop breathing. Only a handful of people will
witness the event.
That's got me perplexed. Why is Ross being put to death under the cover of
darkness? Shouldn't we be killing this monster at high noon?
If deterrence is the raison d'etre for the death penalty, as proponents of
capital punishment claim, doesn't it make sense to get the greatest
exposure, the biggest bang for Connecticut's buck, if you will, by
televising the event?
What more riveting reality TV could there be than Michael Ross eating his
last meal, trudging into the death chamber, uttering his final words and
then gracefully expiring, as is his desire. We could title the program
"The Grim Reaper." Bet it would top the ratings of "Supernanny."
Think of the possibilities. Ross' execution could be made required viewing
in every high school classroom, every detention center, every jail cell in
the state. Wanna get the murder rate down in the cities? What better way
than to force every kid at Hartford Public to watch Ross' minute-by-minute
descent into hell.
Instead, by offing him in the wee hours of the morning, state correction
officials are acting as though Connecticut has something to be ashamed of.
Au contraire. It's about time Connecticut shed its stodgy image as an
educated and effete state and got down in the muck with Texas and Florida.
We're Connecticut, hear us roar. We're proud to be the first New England
state in 45 years to put someone to death.
But Ross' execution won't be televised because capital punishment isn't a
deterrent. And Connecticut's mean streets won't be any safer with Ross
having been killed. The deterrence argument is a big lie, just as it's a
big lie for death penalty supporters to claim that tax dollars will be
saved by executing him.
As Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, co-chairman of the legislature's Judiciary
Committee, put it, "If he had been sentenced to life in prison, that would
have been the end of it. It would have been cheaper, uncontroversial and
anonymous."
Put the emphasis on cheaper. Since the day Ross was arrested 21 years ago,
the costs have piled sky-high, not just for his incarceration but for
batteries of attorneys and psychiatrists, court appeals and last-ditch
attempts aimed at preventing his execution. The legal expenses alone are
estimated to exceed $1 million.
In a 2003 report to the General Assembly, the Division of Public Defender
Services said the average cost of defending a death penalty case was
$380,000, with some cases hitting $1.1 million. Contrast that with the
average cost of defending a case involving life imprisonment without
parole: $202,365 with a top cost of $320,580.
Since the first of the year, there's been a frenzy of judicial activity,
with two Superior Court judges, the state Supreme Court, two federal
judges and even the U.S. Supreme Court weighing in on matters ranging from
whether Ross' father has standing to where protesters can stage their
demonstration.
Then there's the cost of the execution itself, which on Jan. 14 was
reported to be $33,000 for items such as travel for the execution team's
training, drugs, portable restrooms, a mobile office, uniform patches and
curtains for the witness observation room.
But of course, cost has nothing to do with whether Michael Ross lives or
dies. That and the deterrence factor are smokescreens for the only true
reason for his execution: revenge. Why else would family members of four
of the murdered women be invited to attend?
"In the end, we are all judged by our deeds, not our words," said Gov. M.
Jodi Rell in announcing her decision last month not to delay the
execution. "Michael Ross has already been judged for his despicable deeds.
Now it is time for him to face his punishment."
Boiled down to its nub, this execution is about Connecticut avenging the
killing of eight young women.
So let's not mince words or sugarcoat what's about to happen. The
purposeful taking of another person's life is murder. On Wednesday, when
that lethal mixture is injected into Michael Ross' arm in the darkness of
night, we will all be complicit in his death.
---
Source : The Hartford Courant (Michele Jacklin is The Courant's political
columnist)
softie
January 23, 2005
Michele Jacklin, The Hartford Courant
At 2:01 a.m. on Wednesday, in the execution chamber at Osborn Correctional
Institution in Somers, a syringe containing a lethal dose of sodium
thiopental will be emptied into Michael Ross' left arm. If all goes well,
a few minutes later he will stop breathing. Only a handful of people will
witness the event.
That's got me perplexed. Why is Ross being put to death under the cover of
darkness? Shouldn't we be killing this monster at high noon?
If deterrence is the raison d'etre for the death penalty, as proponents of
capital punishment claim, doesn't it make sense to get the greatest
exposure, the biggest bang for Connecticut's buck, if you will, by
televising the event?
What more riveting reality TV could there be than Michael Ross eating his
last meal, trudging into the death chamber, uttering his final words and
then gracefully expiring, as is his desire. We could title the program
"The Grim Reaper." Bet it would top the ratings of "Supernanny."
Think of the possibilities. Ross' execution could be made required viewing
in every high school classroom, every detention center, every jail cell in
the state. Wanna get the murder rate down in the cities? What better way
than to force every kid at Hartford Public to watch Ross' minute-by-minute
descent into hell.
Instead, by offing him in the wee hours of the morning, state correction
officials are acting as though Connecticut has something to be ashamed of.
Au contraire. It's about time Connecticut shed its stodgy image as an
educated and effete state and got down in the muck with Texas and Florida.
We're Connecticut, hear us roar. We're proud to be the first New England
state in 45 years to put someone to death.
But Ross' execution won't be televised because capital punishment isn't a
deterrent. And Connecticut's mean streets won't be any safer with Ross
having been killed. The deterrence argument is a big lie, just as it's a
big lie for death penalty supporters to claim that tax dollars will be
saved by executing him.
As Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, co-chairman of the legislature's Judiciary
Committee, put it, "If he had been sentenced to life in prison, that would
have been the end of it. It would have been cheaper, uncontroversial and
anonymous."
Put the emphasis on cheaper. Since the day Ross was arrested 21 years ago,
the costs have piled sky-high, not just for his incarceration but for
batteries of attorneys and psychiatrists, court appeals and last-ditch
attempts aimed at preventing his execution. The legal expenses alone are
estimated to exceed $1 million.
In a 2003 report to the General Assembly, the Division of Public Defender
Services said the average cost of defending a death penalty case was
$380,000, with some cases hitting $1.1 million. Contrast that with the
average cost of defending a case involving life imprisonment without
parole: $202,365 with a top cost of $320,580.
Since the first of the year, there's been a frenzy of judicial activity,
with two Superior Court judges, the state Supreme Court, two federal
judges and even the U.S. Supreme Court weighing in on matters ranging from
whether Ross' father has standing to where protesters can stage their
demonstration.
Then there's the cost of the execution itself, which on Jan. 14 was
reported to be $33,000 for items such as travel for the execution team's
training, drugs, portable restrooms, a mobile office, uniform patches and
curtains for the witness observation room.
But of course, cost has nothing to do with whether Michael Ross lives or
dies. That and the deterrence factor are smokescreens for the only true
reason for his execution: revenge. Why else would family members of four
of the murdered women be invited to attend?
"In the end, we are all judged by our deeds, not our words," said Gov. M.
Jodi Rell in announcing her decision last month not to delay the
execution. "Michael Ross has already been judged for his despicable deeds.
Now it is time for him to face his punishment."
Boiled down to its nub, this execution is about Connecticut avenging the
killing of eight young women.
So let's not mince words or sugarcoat what's about to happen. The
purposeful taking of another person's life is murder. On Wednesday, when
that lethal mixture is injected into Michael Ross' arm in the darkness of
night, we will all be complicit in his death.
---
Source : The Hartford Courant (Michele Jacklin is The Courant's political
columnist)