The New Face of Bigotry

There is an insidious epidemic of injustice in America, a malignant plague of moral and ethical corruption that is eating away at the integrity of our judicial system from within, undermining any confidence our society can have in our judicial system itself.
Is our contemporary use of capital punishment being maliciously exploited by the new face of bigotry as morally and ethically corrupt prosecutors and judges deliberately manipulate the judicial system to convict and condemn innocent men and women for no other purpose but to unscrupulously advance their own political agendas? Are the poor and underprivileged now the new faces of victims of morally intolerable discrimination, especially in the Deep South, as these politically ambitious parasites willfully send innocent men and women to death row, condemning them not because they are guilty of a crime, but because of their inability to defend against the charges.
In recent years over 125 men and women have been exonerated and released from death rows across the country after being found by the courts to have been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death. What do virtually all of these victims of injustice have in common? Every one of these men and women were poor and underprivileged, financially incapable of defending against the relatively infinite resources of the state. How many of these victims of the ultimate injustice were deliberately targeted for prosecution not because of a good faith belief in their guilt, but because of their impoverished status; they were easy to convict in spite of innocence?
The undeniable truth is that there are two distinct systems of law and justice in this country – there is justice for the rich and there is justice for the poor. When it comes to “justice” in America, you get what you pay for. On one hand we watch as those of wealth and privilege accused of horrific crimes buy their justice with multi million dollar “dream team” defenses while at the opposite extreme we consistently see the poor and underprivileged being victimized by a judicial system that has grown increasingly indifferent, even openly hostile, to the basic concepts of fundamental fairness and equality of all men before our Courts of Law.
Even if unquestionably guilty (much less actually innocent!) those of wealth and privilege are almost never condemned to death. In our system in which justice is supposedly “blind,” it certainly recognizes the smell of money as capital punishment in America is reserved exclusively for the lumpenproletariats of our society – the lowest of low, only the poor and underprivileged. What is the difference between racial prejudice and socio-economical prejudice? As a progressively maturing society we have grown justifiably intolerant of racial prejudice, recognizing bigotry for the morally destructive malignancy that it is. Where once in the not so distant past our Courts even found slavery to be constitutional, today our contemporary judicial system rightfully – if not obviously belated – recognizes as a matter of moral conscience and judicial integrity a contempt for racially motivated injustices.
But has our seemingly inherent need to hate actually only evolved into a less visible but equally insidious means of practicing discrimination by now embracing a socio-economical bias in our administration of justice, which invites unethical prosecutors to deliberately target the poor and underprivileged and unjustly convict, and even condemn them to death, in spite of innocence?
The administration of “justice” is defined as the action, or principle, of treating all persons equally and fairly in accordance with the law. Constitutional due process demands the preservation and practice of equality and fairness within our judicial system. Ultimately, any society is not judged by the privileges afforded those of wealth, but by the protections provided to the very least of society against the arbitrary and unfair actions of government.
When our judicial system cannot – or will not – protect the very least if our citizens against prejudicially motivated injustices resulting in the unconscionably high rate of wrongfully convicted and condemned men and women as evidenced by a consistent, self-evident pattern of socio-economical bias, then that intolerable deprivation of equality under the law constitutes a pervasive moral corruption that will inevitably eat away at the very soul of our society, ultimately undermining the fundamental foundation upon which our democracy remains precariously balanced.

Does Innocence Really Even Matter?
What if you are the deliberate victim of an unethical, overzealous prosecutor who maliciously uses his power of office to manipulate – even fabricate—wholly circumstantial evidence with the calculated intent to have you wrongfully convicted and condemned to death in spite of your innocence? What few people realize is that our United States Supreme Court has given even corrupt prosecutors “absolute immunity” – that as long as they are acting in a prosecutorial capacity they can intentionally fabricate evidence and even conspire with and coerce witnesses to commit perjury to deliberately have an innocent man wrongfully convicted and condemned to death, and remain absolutely immune from accountability. Imber v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) There is a common misconception that after a person is convicted and condemned to death every capital case is thoroughly reviewed by the appellate courts to ensure specifically that the person is actually guilty of the alleged crime. That is absolutely not true! By law, the courts are only authorized to review specifically raised claims of alleged error. The burden is upon the condemned to prove that error was sufficient enough to have resulted in the deprivation of a “fair trial.” A claim of actual innocence by itself cannot be raised or reviewed as our Supreme Court has unequivocally declared that our Constitution only guarantees a “fair trial” – it does not prohibit the states from executing an innocent person. Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993) If you are wrongfully convicted and condemned to death for a crime you are innocent of – even if God himself and a council of twelve archangels were to miraculously appear before the Supreme Court to attest your actual innocence – the Courts are legally prohibited from vacation that conviction merely because you are innocent.
The entire system of appellate review is inherently dependent upon the condemned prisoner receiving competent legal representation not only at trial, but throughout the entire post conviction review process as any claims of alleged error must be properly – and timely – presented to the courts for review. Any failure to fully comply with the myriad of technically complex rules applicable to capital appellate review results in strictly enforced procedural defaults that prohibit a court from reviewing that alleged error; Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722 (1991). Even when newly discovered evidence conclusively proving your actual innocence is not properly raised by competent legal council within applicable time limitations the courts are prohibited from reviewing the evidence.
Since only the poor and underprivileged are sentenced to death, once a person is wrongfully convicted and condemned to death for a crime they are innocent of, they become entirely dependent upon the system to provide them with the legal representation necessary to raise their claims of alleged error. However, the Supreme Court has declared that indigent death sentenced prisoner do not have any right to appointment of legal counsel once a conviction has been affirmed on initial review. In fact, the Court held that a condemned prisoner has no right to legal representation at all in post conviction proceedings. Murray v. Giarratano, 402 U.S. 1 (1988).
Most states accept that they cannot “morally” carry out an execution unless the condemned prisoner is technically represented by legal counsel; so the states create politically controlled agencies to represent the condemned (See, “A Matter of Law and Death,” St. Petersburg Times, April 10, 2006) which then arguably by deliberate intent and design appoint inexperienced and even pathetically incompetent lawyers. Intentionally reducing post conviction review to nothing more that a pathetically superficial pretense with the objective of expediting executions by circumventing meaningful review of capital convictions. Does innocence really even matter? No, innocence is not even a legitimate legal issue once you’ve been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death. As our U.S. Supreme Court plainly said, our Constitution—our American judicial system – does not prohibit the conviction and subsequent execution of an innocent person.

Legally Sanctioned Lynching
Where not so long ago the Deep South was infamously known for its white sheets and midnight lynching today’s contemporary bigots now were tailored suits and manipulate the judicial system into carrying out their legally sanctioned lynching. When we consistently see that it is only the poorest that are being wrongfully convicted and condemned to death, especially in the small towns of the South, can we any longer deny that this malignancy of socio-economical prejudice is presently being openly practiced within our judicial system today – and even being facilitated and condoned at the highest levels of our judiciary?
The simple truth is that although most are honorable and serve with integrity, just as there are bad cops, there are bad prosecutors. Accountability weeds out the “bad apples” in law enforcement and preserves the integrity of the law enforcement system as a whole. But in our judicial system morally and ethically corrupt prosecutors who deliberately convict and condemn innocent people by maliciously using fabricated evidence, coerced false testimony, and willfully violate the most basic rights of the criminal defendant are not being held accountable. If the “bad apples” are not removed from our judicial system, inevitably they will rot the whole bunch.
In Florida alone at least 25 men and women have been exonerated and released from death row – the majority of whom were wrongfully convicted and condemned to death because of deliberate prosecutorial misconduct, yet not even once has the prosecutor responsible for unethically perpetuating these inconceivable injustices been held accountable.
Florida by far leads the country in the staggering number of men and women wrongfully convicted and condemned to death in a large part because a single State Attorney’s Office (Twentieth Judicial Circuit) has the highest rate of wrongful capital convictions in the entire country.
Comprised of mostly rural, small farming communities of Southwest Florida (Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee Counties) this single office alone has already sent at least five innocent men to death row, all subsequently found to have been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death, and ordered released by the courts. (Delbert Tibbs, James Richardson, Bradley Scott, John Landry, and John Ballard). Examination of these cases shows a consistent pattern of manipulating the judicial system with flagrant disregard for ethical constraints and a flagitious contempt for justice.
Is this is a rats nest of state sanctioned serial killers methodically preying upon the poor and underprivileged, deliberately and insidiously victimizing those incapable of defending against the over whelming resources and power of the state? Incredibly, to this day there has not been a single investigation into why this one office has such a staggering rate of wrongful convictions. How many more innocent victims of injustice remain in prison – even on death row – as a result of unethical prosecution by this state attorney’s office?
John Ballard was the most recent exoneree released from Florida’s death row after being convicted and condemned to death in a wholly circumstantial case (no eyewitnesses, no physical or forensic evidence, no confession, etc) by the 20th Judicial Circuit State Attorney’s Office top prosecutor, Deputy Assistant State Attorney, Randall McGruther. In 2006 the Florida Supreme Court threw out the convictions and ordered the release of Ballard after thoroughly examining the specious circumstantial evidence, concluding that there was no credible evidence sufficient to support any conviction.
Randall McGruther received his job as top prosecutor, the Deputy Assistant State Attorney for the 20th Judicial Circuit, by his long time personal friend the elected State Attorney, Steve Russell shortly after McGruther was alleged to have attempted to improperly coerce a witness into signing a fabricated affidavit in a criminal case. With the proverbial fox guarding the hen house, is it any surprise that no formal charges of misconduct were ever brought against McGruther?
But it is McGruther’s personal prosecution of another wholly circumstantial capital case that best illustrates the absence of integrity and ethical constraint in that office. It is that case that provides a graphic portrait of the epitome of a Southern Injustice by illustrating how relatively easy it is for corrupt agents of the state to maliciously fabricate a capital case with deliberate intent to send an innocent men to death row – and the morally despicable lengths these state agents will subsequently go to in an effort to prevent the truth of that unconscionable injustice from being exposed.
The integrity of our judicial system is inherently dependent upon the integrity of those we empower to enforce our laws. An examination of the staggering numbers of cases in which innocent men have been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death in the 20th Judicial Circuit of Florida shows that each of these men were poor and underprivileged, incapable of defending against the resources of a morally and ethically corrupt office.
This is the new face of bigotry and injustice in the South, where simply being poor is enough to target a man for a legally sanctioned lynching.

The Epitome of a Southern Injustice

Have you read John Grisham’s most recent bestseller “The Innocent man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town”? In this book Grisham tells the true-life tragic story of how a once promising baseball player was wrongfully convicted and condemned to death in a small town in Oklahoma. For almost eleven years Ron Williamson remained on death row before finally being exonerated by DNA evidence and released.
But as Grisham’s book shows, at least as equally traumatic as the injustice of being wrongfully convicted and condemned to death is the subsequent inevitable psychological degradation of being unjustly warehoused in long-term solitaire confinement under extremely oppressive and inhumane conditions, never for a moment allowed to forget that you are there only to die. That interminable state of prolonged uncertainty of your fate is the truly irreversible infliction imposed upon the wrongfully condemned.
At 48 years old Mike Lambrix has now spent most of his entire adult life (25 years) on Florida’s death row for a crime he is innocent of. In early 1983, Lambrix moved to rural Glades County to take a job as a farm mechanic. A stranger in a small southern town, Lambrix soon found himself charged in a locally sensationalized double homicide, then indicted on two counts of a capital crime.
At the time Randall McGruther was a relatively inexperienced, but ambitious, small town prosecutor anxious to make a name for himself. Even with no eyewitnesses, no physical or forensic evidence, and no confessions, before Lambrix was even arrested McGruther was publicly proclaiming his own specious theory that this monster had meandered into their midst, maliciously luring an innocent couple to an isolated area, and then brutally killing them in a sick and senseless crime.
Lambrix was appointed a young public defender with no prior experience handling a capital case and the pretense of justice began. Having succeeded in working the local community into a bloodthirsty frenzy with outrageous exaggerated stories McGruther then strenuously opposed moving the trial out of Glades County. The case was presided over by Judge Richard Stanley, himself formally a local prosecutor with a reputation for contempt towards capital defendants and an overzealous advocate of the death penalty, See, Porter v. State, 728 So 2d 191 (Fla. 1998)(recognizing Judge Stanley’s extreme bias.)
An all white jury was seated to hear the case that included four jurors directly related to members of the local sheriff’s office – including the stepfather of a local deputy who at the time of trial was under an active FBI investigation for brutally assaulting Lambrix in the two-cell county jail only a few months earlier.
McGruther opened the state’s case by conceding to the jury that the entire case was built upon the testimony of Lambrix’s own ex-girlfriend, Frances Smith, who had accompanied Lambrix to a local bar that fateful night where by chance they had met this “couple.” After many hours of drinking the four ended up at Lambrix’s remote residence where – McGruther arguing his own fallaciously fabricated theory – Lambrix then maliciously lured each out one at a time, them brutally murdered them before “forcing” Francis Smith to assist in superficially concealing the two bodies and fleeing the area.
Smith testified that although she did not actually see Lambrix commit any crime, he later told her that he deliberately killed the two to steal their car; her testimony was then corroborated by Deborah Hanzel, (Smith’s own cousin’s girlfriend) who testified Lambrix also told her he had killed them to take their car.
The jury was not allowed to hear that Smith had actually told law enforcement officials numerous other stories prior to trial that directly conflicted with her trial testimony and that she also had failed a state administered polygraph test. Additionally, the jury was not allowed to hear that the male victim was a career criminal and “known drug smuggler” with a history of violently assaulting women and had only recently met the young local waitress killed a few days earlier. See, Lambrix v. State, 494 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 1986)
Following a disagreement over the defense strategy, Lambrix’s counsel compelled the Judge to prohibit Lambrix from personally testifying thus Smith’s claims of what Lambrix allegedly said went unchallenged. See, Lambrix v. Singletary, 72 F. 3d 1500 (11th Cir. 1996) No defense was presented beyond the argument that substantial reasonable doubt existed as the specious theory argued by McGruther plainly contradicted the evidence and the key witness was conspiring to have her estranged ex-boyfriend (Lambrix) wrongfully convicted and condemned to death. But McGruther argued there was no actual evidence of any conspiracy. See, A Parody Of Justice (St. Petersburg Times, August 31, 1997)
That evidence of an actual conspiracy and collaboration between the key witness and the state attorney’s office to, by deliberate intent and design, have Lambrix wrongfully convicted and condemned to death would remain intentionally concealed for many years, but inevitably the truth has a way of coming out. (For a complete chronological account of this case please see, www.southerninjustice.net )
In 1988 Lambrix came within hours of execution after a “death warrant” was signed, but he received a “stay” so that the Federal Court could review his appeals. By 1997 the Federal Courts denied his appeals, and in a 5 to 4 vote the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Lambrix’s death sentences even though recognizing Lambrix was unconstitutionally sentenced to death upon finding that Lambrix’s appointed counsel failed to properly present the claims. See, Lambrix v. Singletary, 520 U.S. 518 (1997)
As Lambrix prepared to be moved back to “death watch” with little hope of stopping the now anticipated execution, astonishing new evidence came forth from an unexpected source when former state witness Deborah Hanzel, in an act of “conscience,” admitted that her trial testimony was false. In a subsequent affidavit and under sworn oath she was even more explicit – she was coerced to provide false testimony by the key witness Smith and the investigator for the state attorney’s office, and that an actual conspiracy to fabricate false evidence existed with the intent of having Lambrix wrongfully convicted. As Lambrix’s attorneys immediately initiated an investigation into Hanzel’s claims, that a deliberate conspiracy existed to wrongfully convict Lambrix, even more startling evidence was discovered. Shortly before a court hearing in 2004 Lambrix’s attorneys unexpectedly received information that while Lambrix was being prosecuted, the key witness – his estranged ex-girlfriend Frances Smith – was actually having a secret relationship “of a sexual nature” with the state attorney’s own lead investigator, Robert Daniels. Under oath in court, confronted with this information Smith reluctantly admitted it was true. Investigator Daniels was not only the lead investigator in the local state attorney’s office. He was also the very person who signed the affidavit originally initiating these charges against Lambrix, then personally supervised the development of the wholly circumstantial evidence used at trial to corroborate Smith’s otherwise unsupported allegations.
A top expert in homicide investigations was retained to independently re-examine the case and concluded that the state’s entire theory was based upon fabricated and deliberately manipulated evidence – that there was no credible evidence to support the theory McGruther argued to the jury. Additionally, two former state medical examiners reviewed the original medical examiner’s autopsy reports and found no evidence to support the state’s conclusions. Not surprisingly, fingernail scrapings taken from the female victim that would have allowed DNA tests to conclusively show who killed her conveniently disappeared. See, An Uncertain Capital Case (St. Petersburg Times, July 11, 2004)
As evidence that McGruther personally participated in the now revealed conspiracy and collaboration to have Lambrix wrongfully convicted and condemned to death was developed, after over 20 years of making a career out of methodically stalking Lambrix’s unjustified execution, McGruther was compelled to disqualify himself from the case for “ethical” reasons – but handpicked his personal friend and colleague Assistant State Attorney Cynthia Ross to now continue pursuing the execution of Lambrix.
With the evidence and motive now revealed, exposing this deliberate conspiracy and collaboration to, by intent and design, have Lambrix wrongfully convicted and condemned to death additional evidence recently disclosed now also shows that the state attorney’s office had concealed an “immunity deal” made with the key witness Smith that protected her from prosecution for felony charges pending against her.
Even with this overwhelming evidence now substantiated Lambrix’s long pled claims of innocence the state remains unwilling to concede any error. Rather than allow justice to finally prevail, the local state attorney’s office is now assisted by one of Florida’s most experience capital appellate litigator, Florida’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General Carol Dittmar. Unable to any longer credibly challenge the validity of the collective evidence, both the state agents and the lower trial court are engaging in a campaign to disingenuously drag this case out and prevent full exposure of this unconscionable injustice. In July 2006 the state offered Lambrix a substantial reduction of sentence if Lambrix would drop all further appeals – Lambrix refused. How much longer must Lambrix suffer this injustice?
What Can You Do?
There is a systematic pattern of morally and ethically corrupt prosecutors pathologically targeting the poor and underprivileged of our society, maliciously manipulating the judicial system to intentionally convict and condemn innocent men and women, then exploiting the resources of the state to perpetuate the already inconceivable injustice. Can we continue to deny that this insidious epidemic of injustice represents a contemporary form of malignant socio-economical discrimination and our refusal to recognize and eradicate this cancerous plague of bigotry and injustice from our society is as equally immoral as if we were personally participating in the lynching of the innocent ourselves?
In confronting the moral corruption of bigotry and injustice Abraham Lincoln once said, “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” Until society itself starts to demand accountability this contemptuous corruption of injustice will continue as morally and ethically corrupt prosecutors empower themselves as state sanctioned serial killers.
Only by committing ourselves to standing up to fight individual injustices can the integrity of justice itself prevail. The Lambrix case is only one of too many examples of inconceivable injustices being perpetuated against those incapable of defending against the overwhelming resources of the state.
In the late 1980’s there was a similar case from the same small area, that of James Richardson. He was convicted and sentenced to death for allegedly poisoning all his children to collect the insurance money but had his sentence reduced to life. While in prison he gathered support that led to Governor Martinez appointing Janet Reno who was then a state attorney in Miami, to conduct an independent investigation that resulted in her finding the case was corrupted by fabricated circumstantial evidence. This led to Richardson’s eventual release. Please help us push for a similar independent investigation and fair review of the Lambrix case by writing or emailing the Governor (Charlie Crist) and the Attorney General (Bill McCollum) of Florida to request the appointment of an objective special investigator like Governor Martinez did in the Richardson case. You can make a difference in compelling productive change by joining a grass roots drive to push for justice, to publicly expose these injustices and compel politicians and public officials to conduct investigations into corrupt prosecutors and hold them accountable.

Return to my main blog

Check out my website www.southerninjustice.net

The Yellow Brick Road

Outside the window a cricket sings out in its private celebration of life,
as the humid aroma of recent showers steaming off the hot concrete barely overcomes the stench of a hundred living souls compressed into an abyss of lost humanity.

Darkness, in its possessive manner, steals its way forth as I stand at the front of my cell.

Beyond the bars that separate me from the rest of the world, I can bask in the simple pleasure of watching day give way to night in my own selfish celebration that I have endured - and even survived -yet another day.
This is my evening ritual; my way of paying homage to the ability and inner strength of perseverance.

And even in this shadow of condemnation, I do find strength.

I accept that the definitive measure and molding of character is not simply the ability to survive adversity - but to overcome and even manipulate the essence of adversity into a productive entity of which I might find the strength to master.

I cannot see beyond this artificial hell in which I've been confined.

The horizon I see is nothing more than a scattered number of lights flooding the compound grounds and dancing with glittering fire upon the honed edges of razor wire that lie between the statuesque "iron curtain" perimeters.

The only sign of life in this world outside is a spotlight, as it lazily rakes its way across the grounds in an unpredictable, haphazard manner.

But even as they've confined and condemned my body, there remains a part of me that is rebelliously free; that no amount of steel and stone can confine and no man can condemn.

Within the inner self of the man I am, just as within every condemned prisoner, there's a path that leads its way off into a different horizon.

This path is landscaped and lined with the symbolic fruits of faith, hope, encouragement and perseverance; stolen moments of our humanity - and even sanity.

For each of us, we strive to maintain some recognizable, progressive forward motion, refusing to succumb to the environment, finding inner strength to keep pushing ahead one slow step at a time.

And all too often, it is a constant struggle, as this imaginative path takes its twists and turns through the highest of emotional peaks, to the lowest of emotional valleys.

For me, I call this imaginative escape from the reality of condemnation the "Yellow Brick Road", in personal reflection of the theologically symbolic nature and promise of the covenant of the rainbow; because even in the worst of storms, there's always the presence of a rainbow.

And somewhere over the rainbow is the promise of hope.

And this Yellow Brick Road is my odyssey through Oz - my exodus through hell.

And somewhere at the end of the Yellow Brick Road is my redemption.
And it is a strange road.

                                               

There's night and there's day.

With the night comes; the uncertainty and even fear of darkness; the long moments and hours of hopelessness and despair, the feeling that all has already been lost, and that to continue would be futile, the mocking echo of silence, which serves to remind me that I am alone in this concrete crypt.

Long nights of lying awake - unable to sleep as thoughts of what was and what might have been haunt me.

The demons of darkness creep stealthily in to rob me of my most prized possessions of hope, faith, and the strength of perseverance.

But then comes the new day and with it mixed confusion. Darkness, and all it holds, has again been defeated - but there is no joyous victory as the new day does little to restore the gradual erosion of those values that compel me forth.

The day brings with it the anticipation and anxiety of uncertainty; of hopelessness borne of living in an environment of forced conformity and dependence.
Life of the condemned is not life at all.

Rather, it is an existence somewhere between hell and who knows where. A constant state of forced limbo, like a puppet on a string. Having been condemned by society, we now are not allowed to live - or die. Only exist ... if being stored in a virtual warehouse devoid of emotion can be said to constitute an existence.

If life is but the struggle for mere existence and its value judged by longevity - then perhaps by cheating those disciples of death that now demand the forfeiture of my life is itself worthy of that unknown cricket's celebration of life.

I only wish I could find some justification and comfort in that argument. But, I do not; for me life is not merely a struggle for biological existence. Without the preservation of my humanity and individuality, such an existence would have no meaning, or worth. Here on death row, we do exist.

Yet through the condemnation imposed upon us, society has deprived us of the recognition of our existence -- denying our humanity.

It is not enough to condemn us.

In society's demented state of moral consciousness, we must first be stripped of our humanity before being deprived of our life. To recognize our humanity is to create a reflection of their own inherent imperfection, as well as face the truth that they are taking a human life. But to make us less than human pacifies society's guilt.

They don't kill any particular individual, but rather something less than an individual.

And so for years on end a death of the inner self is methodically inflicted upon us so very gradually that it's practically unperceivable. An erosion of all emotion, until having been subjected to the endless rigor of administrative conformity, the person within is lost in a penologically conditioned sacrificial surrender.

The strength to resist no longer remains and without realizing it - we have been subdued.

Conformance, and compliance - even the acceptance of death - become a form of adoptive security, protecting us from confronting atrocities we've suffered in the name of justice and "We The People."
But for each of us, there is a Yellow Brick Road; an escape from the reality of our condemnation; a place of solace and security.

The adversity we suffer remains and continues to plague us; continues to rob us of the humanity and individuality we so desperately cling to. But as long as we each keep sight of our own Yellow Brick Road, we will deprive our captors and executioners of the theft of our humanity and stand strong in our inner strength.

Not only to survive -- but to overcome.

Michael Lambrix

Return to my main blog

Check out my website www.southerninjustice.net

Bowels Of The Beast

If being imprisoned can be described as descending into the “Belly of the Beast.” Then not only being imprisoned, but condemned to death must bring one beyond that belly into the very Bowels of the Beast. Being condemned to the many years of solitary confinement under that sentence of death is itself a fate worse than death. This experience is not unlike that told in Dante’s “Inferno.” A work of classic literature that tells the story of a man who finds himself sent to hell. His only hope to escape this fate is to descend into the bowels of hell, to pass through the numerous levels, each progressively worse than the last, and only by surviving this journey might he have the hope of being free from condemnation. As bad as it might be when one first arrives, it only becomes worse as the many months and years slowly pass by. With each day, each week, each month, and each year that outside world drifts further and further away. In that solitaire world we call “death row” one is neither allowed to live or die but only exists in a state of perverted limbo, struggling not only in an inherently hostile environment but also in the seemingly elusive hope of “justice” as the very essence of your life itself slowly erodes away and is lost forever, and even death itself becomes seen as acceptable means of escape from the eternal torment of this never ending uncertainty. Upon being sentenced to death the condemned are kept in solitary confinement in segregated units designed not only to isolate the prisoner from the rest of us in the world, but even from each other. Not even one for one moment of a single day is the condemned prisoner allowed to forget that he exists now only to die, Death itself becomes the very fiber that collectively binds this morbid artificial and methodically structures environment together. As you struggle to mentally survive there are those around you that one by one descend into the inevitable psychological degradation culminating in acts of desperation as they might give up what hope might remain and waive their appeals – or simply be found hanging by a bed sheet in the silence of their own cells – as even that certainty of self inflicted death becomes more merciful than this perpetual state of uncertainty. Perhaps there are those who will say that such a prolonged and torturous existence is itself part of the punishment imposed upon those sentenced to death, that they should suffer as much as possible before they are put to a physical death. But then to respectfully paraphrase the German philosopher Nietzsche when we (individually or as a collective society) deal with monsters every day the greatest threat to us is not the monsters themselves, but of becoming the monster ourselves. If we deliberately inflict upon the condemned the same barbaric acts we condemned then for, then how are we any better? When out of malice and intent we deliberately inflict torturous acts upon another, are we not then becoming monsters ourselves? But then what of those later found to have been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death? In recent years over 125 men and women have been exonerated by the courts and released from death row; after being found to have been wrongfully convicted and condemned to death. See, www.southerninjustice.net and there can be no doubt that there are still many more innocent victims of our inherently imperfect judicial system still on death row. See, Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied with so many innocent men and women being wrongfully convicted and condemned to death, how can anyone advocate deliberately imposing prolonged suffering upon any of the condemned? Being wrongfully convicted and condemned to death is not about actually being put to death as the true injustice – the inevitable and irreparable injury – inflicted upon the innocent is that condemnation to an existence under the never relenting threat of death; of the ever increasing isolation as family and friends give up hope and are never heard from again; of the ever changing faces of lawyers who although all too often become your only contact with the world outside never the less meticulously keep their distance and even perceive your frustrations at the injustice as the manifestation of a “difficult” client and abruptly abandon your case when a better job comes along. See, Legal Representation In Capital Cases – Privilege or Pretense? It’s about the faded photographs of a life that once was and is now lost forever. It’s about laying awake on yet another sleepless night remembering the fading fragments of better times only to realize even your own children are now grown and gone and the grandchildren that are never seen. Words along cannot begin to grasp the depth of the impact upon those of us condemned and confined to the solitary existence, virtually powerless to influence the conditions of the environment – conditions of deliberate, extreme inhumane deprivation, of being subjected to the monotonously structured regime for an endless and seemingly eternal period of time constantly reminded that you are virtually warehoused only until the time of your own death – an intentionally inflicted death at the hands of those who today feed you. Recently there has been renewed questions of whether the means and methods of carrying out the actual execution of the condemned constitutes an act of cruel and unusual punishment given the numerous incidents of botched executions where the condemned prisoner obviously suffered a prolonged and painful death. Challenges to the use of the electric chair after numerous malfunctions resulting in the prisoner quite literally bursting into flames as witnesses watched in horror led to most states doing away with their electric chair and adopting the alternate of lethal injection as a more “humane” way to put a man to death. The recent execution of Angel Diaz in Florida on December 13, 2006 proved beyond any doubt that no matter what form of actual execution is adopted inevitably “mistakes” will happen and what was supposed to a “humane” and meticulously planned execution becomes as act of prolonged physical torture as the condemned helplessly struggles in pain. No matter what form of execution we choose, we simply cannot eliminate the inevitable element of human error. The bigger question we have yet to ask is whether the long-term confinement while condemned to death is itself an infliction of cruel and unusual punishment that makes the death penalty constitutionally intolerable. As the ever increasingly complexity of appellate review in capital cases results in the average length of a condemned prisoners stay on death row now easily exceeding a full decade – there are now many prisoners condemned to death for over 30 continuous years – can we as a civilized society continue to ignore that the very nature of being condemned to death, that prolonged uncertainty of the fate that awaits, is itself “cruel and unusual” punishment violative of even the most basic notions of a presumably civilized society, making the death penalty itself constitutionally intolerable? As a presumably civilized society we impose constitutional prohibition against governmental actions that “shock the conscious,” a term that is itself measured as a matter of constitutional law as being found to be offensive to “the evolving standards of decency of a civilized society.” When we stand before the rest if the world and hold ourselves out as a model of social and civil rights, how is it that we now remain alone in the western world in practicing capital punishment? Condemning any man, especially an innocent man, to death brings with it a fate far worse than death itself – being condemned to the Bowels of the Beast, to exist quite literally in a cage under objectively inhumane conditions for many years, even decades constantly reminded that you are condemned to death. It is that existence itself that makes even death by whatever means might claim you a mercy killing, not an act of judicially imposed punishment. Although it is only too easy to discount the claims of a condemned man and brush aside any concerns of conscience over this barbarically inflicted “punishment, “ this position, that it is the prolonged confinement under sentence of death itself that is a fate worse than death has been widely recognized by noted jurists – even Supreme Court Justices – and scholars alike through the years. See, Coleman v. Balkcom, 451 U.S. 949, 952 (1981) (Stevens, J. concurring) (recognizing that the mental pain suffered by a condemned prisoner awaiting execution “is a significant for form of punishment (that) may well be comparable to the consequences of the ultimate step itself – the actual execution.”); Furman V. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 288-89 (1972)(Brennan, J. concurring)(“we know that the mental pain is an inseparable part of our practice of punishing criminals by death, for the prospect of pending execution exacts a frightful toll during the inevitable long wait between the imposition of sentence and the actual infliction of death.”) Those most familiar with the prolonged confinement of prisoners on death row — the wardens of the prisons themselves – have also publicly expressed their belief that the many years under sentence of death is itself a fate worse than that of death. The former warden of San Quentin wrote (see, Duffy and Hirshberg, Eighty Eight Men and Two Woman 254 (1962) that “One night on dearth row is too long and the length of time spent there by (some inmates) constitutes cruelty that defies the imagination. It has always been a source of wonder to me that they didn’t go stark, raving mad.” More recently, the former warden of Florida’s death row, Dennis O’Neil has now become an opponent to the death penalty. See, “His Turn for Turning the Other Cheek,” St, Petersburg Times, November 23, 2006. Many of the lower court judges have equally recognized that the prolonged wait of that uncertain fate shocks the conscience of any civilized man. See, People v. Anderson, 493 P. 2d 580, 6 cal. 3d 628, 649 (Cal, 1972) (“The cruelty of capital punishment lies not only in the execution itself, but also in the dehumanizing effects of the lengthy imprisonment prior to the execution during which the judicially and administrative procedures essential to due process of, are carried out. Penologists and medical experts agree that the protracted process of carrying out a verdict of death is often so degrading and brutalizing to the human spirit as to constitute psychological torture.”); see also, Suffolk County District Attorney v. Watson, 411 N.E. 2d 1274 (Mass. 1980)(providing vivid and detailed description of the type of psychological pain and torture that a condemned man experiences while awaiting execution, in arguing why capital punishment is unconstitutional under the Massachusetts Constitution because “it will be carried out only after agonizing months and years of uncertainty.”); Hopkinson v. State, 632 P. 2d 79, 209-11 (Rose, Chief Justice)(recognizing “the dehumanizing effects of long term imprisonment pending execution”) We are a constitutional democracy and it is our Constitution itself that, as recognized by our Supreme Court, Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 102 (1976) embodies “broad and idealistic concepts of dignity, civilized standards, humanity and decency” against which forms of punishment imposed by the state must be measured. This Constitutional prohibition against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment “expresses the revulsion of civilized man against barbarous acts – the ‘cry of horror’ against man’s inhumanity to his fellow man,” Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 676 (1962)(Douglas, J. concurring). Supreme Court Justice Antonio Scalia, himself a zealous advocate of the death penalty, (see, The Greater Evil) has recognized that our contemporary constitutional prohibition against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment is based on English Law, see Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 966 (1991)”there is no doubt that Section 10 of the English Bill of Rights of 1689 ‘is the antecedent’ of the cruel and unusual punishments clause of our Eighth Amendment”) Today that origin of prohibition under the English Bill of Rights of 1689 is defined by the Privy Council, which is the highest appellate court for the commonwealth nations, presided over by members of England’s “House of Lords.” In addressing the question of whether the execution of a prisoner after a prolonged period of time offends basic notions of humane treatment in Pratt & Morgan v. Attorney General of Jamerica (Nov. 2, 1993) the Privy Council concluded that “there is an instinctive revulsion against the prospect of executing a man after he has been held under sentence of death for many years, What gives rise to this instinctive revulsion? The answer can only be our own humanity; we regard it as an inhumane act to keep a man facing the agony of execution over a long, extended period of time.” With such a broad consensus on the issue of whether the prolonged period of time under sentence of death constitutes an infliction of cruel and unusual punishment, why are we now the only country in the world that will keep a man in solitary confinement for decades under sentence of death, yet refuse to even address the question of whether this protracted uncertainty of one’s fate is itself a fate far worse than the infliction of death itself? It is the humanity within each of us that ultimately defines us as a “civilized” nation. Rather than focus so much on the question of whether capital punishment is itself cruel and unusual punishment, isn’t it time that we started to both publicly and judicially address the question of whether the inevitable long period of time between imposition of sentence to the finality of appellate review – a period of time now often surpassing 20, even 30 years – is itself a fate far worse than death itself and whether that prolonged solitary confinement of condemned man is what truly makes the contemporary imposition of a sentence of death constitutionally intolerable.

Return to my main blog

Check out my website www.southerninjustice.net