135 down, 455 to go: George W.'s history of execution

Justice - desired by many but understood by few. What truly defines justice? Is it simply some sort of payback aimed at the satisfaction of the victim - and at what cost? Everyone speaks of how justice must be served, but who is the justice really for - and how extreme must that justice be?

Erin McQuinn Playing with Words

Taking a life is arguably the harshest punishment that can be handed down. The use of capital punishment has more than tripled since its re-instatement in 1976. As more and more brutal crimes are being committed, people are searching for some sort of justice, a repayment for the losses that they themselves have suffered. And they ask for that repayment in the form of flesh and blood.

Capital punishment is not about deterring crime. It is about the power of the legal system and the hatred of the afflicted. But this eye for an eye mentality does not decrease crime in any way. A recent study on the state of California actually found crimes to increase in execution years as opposed to non-execution years.

So, truly, what is the purpose of exterminating a life? The same legal system that is believed by so many Americans to have terrible flaws has the power to sentence an innocent person to death. And as exhibited in 80 separate cases that have brought the falsely accused off death row, the legal system does make mistakes. But the chilling reality of the situation is, just how many innocent people were not spared, and had to pay for the shortcomings of an arrogant governor or a judge with a personal vendetta?

As Texas hails as the execution state, boasting 232 men and women sentenced to lethal injection since 1976, I am somewhat fearful for the future of the country if George W. Bush were to be elected president. This Republican candidate who refers to himself as the "law and order governor," exhibits a heartless attitude that would no doubt reflect in many other aspects of his attitudes towards poverty, foreign aid and the overall welfare of the country.

But to Bush, who in his time served has seen more than 135 people to the cold, hard, executionary table says, "As far as I'm concerned, there has not been one innocent person executed since I've been the governor." That is simply flat-out ignorant, G.W.

Even now, in the face of overwhelming evidence of DNA error and a faulty legal system, Bush sticks to his I'm-so-tough-on-crime attitude and refused to back down or issue a moratorium on capital punishment in Texas.

Oh no, I'm sure no error could be made in a state where the judges are allowed to appoint their "favorite" defense lawyers for impoverished defendants. And even after it came to light that some of these lawyers were hard-core cocaine abusers and others actually fell asleep during trial - I'm sure there were no innocent people sentenced to die.

This cold-hearted governor even had the nerve to mock Texas-executed Karla Faye Tucker in a formal interview, amusing the interviewer with an imitation of this now deceased inmate's final plea of, "I don't want to die." It was tastefully re-enacted by G.W. with pursed lips and a whimpering tone.

Texas also executes the most juveniles and mentally retarded citizens. The first time Bush ever issued a temporary 30 day reprieve for anyone sentenced to die was recently, after he was brought under the eye of public scrutiny for being a called a merciless executioner. As the presidential race narrows, he surely doesn't want to be known for his previous track record of turning his back on possible innocence.

The death penalty is only for those who don't have enough money to buy their innocence. It is the punishment for those who cannot afford the best lawyer. It is the punishment for those who kill a white person (83 percent of all death-punished crimes were for the murder of a white man or woman). And finally, it is the punishment of an angry public, looking to place blame wherever they can.

The state of Texas is currently holding 455 inmates on death row. They will probably all die. So how confident are you in a candidate who has time and time again refused to allow a second look at evidence?

How can a candidate be sympathetic to the problems of America when he hasn't even taken the time to possibly save an innocent life?

- Erin McQuinn can be reached at erinmc@umich.edu, however her e-mail probably won't work after the onslaught of responses last week. Thanks for reading.