Don't work. Avoid telling the truth. Be hated. Love someone.

-----
Written by Adrian Tan, author of The Teenage Textbook (1988), was the guest-of-honour at a recent NTU convocation ceremony. This was his speech to the graduating class of 2008.
-----

I must say thank you to the faculty and staff of the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information for inviting me to give your convocation address. It’s a wonderful honour and a privilege for me to speak here for ten minutes without fear of contradiction, defamation or retaliation. I say this as a Singaporean and more so as a husband.

My wife is a wonderful person and perfect in every way except one. She is the editor of a magazine. She corrects people for a living. She has honed her expert skills over a quarter of a century, mostly by practising at home during conversations between her and me.

On the other hand, I am a litigator. Essentially, I spend my day telling people how wrong they are. I make my living being disagreeable.

Nevertheless, there is perfect harmony in our matrimonial home. That is because when an editor and a litigator have an argument, the one who triumphs is always the wife.

And so I want to start by giving one piece of advice to the men: when you’ve already won her heart, you don’t need to win every argument.

Marriage is considered one milestone of life. Some of you may already be married. Some of you may never be married. Some of you will be married. Some of you will enjoy the experience so much, you will be married many, many times. Good for you.

The next big milestone in your life is today: your graduation. The end of education. You’re done learning.

You’ve probably been told the big lie that “Learning is a lifelong process” and that therefore you will continue studying and taking masters’ degrees and doctorates and professorships and so on. You know the sort of people who tell you that? Teachers. Don’t you think there is some measure of conflict of interest? They are in the business of learning, after all. Where would they be without you? They need you to be repeat customers.

The good news is that they’re wrong.

The bad news is that you don’t need further education because your entire life is over. It is gone. That may come as a shock to some of you. You’re in your teens or early twenties. People may tell you that you will live to be 70, 80, 90 years old. That is your life expectancy.

I love that term: life expectancy. We all understand the term to mean the average life span of a group of people. But I’m here to talk about a bigger idea, which is what you expect from your life.

You may be very happy to know that Singapore is currently ranked as the country with the third highest life expectancy. We are behind Andorra and Japan, and tied with San Marino. It seems quite clear why people in those countries, and ours, live so long. We share one thing in common: our football teams are all hopeless. There’s very little danger of any of our citizens having their pulses raised by watching us play in the World Cup. Spectators are more likely to be lulled into a gentle and restful nap.

Singaporeans have a life expectancy of 81.8 years. Singapore men live to an average of 79.21 years, while Singapore women live more than five years longer, probably to take into account the additional time they need to spend in the bathroom.

So here you are, in your twenties, thinking that you’ll have another 40 years to go. Four decades in which to live long and prosper.

Bad news. Read the papers. There are people dropping dead when they’re 50, 40, 30 years old. Or quite possibly just after finishing their convocation. They would be very disappointed that they didn’t meet their life expectancy.

I’m here to tell you this. Forget about your life expectancy.

After all, it’s calculated based on an average. And you never, ever want to expect being average.

Revisit those expectations. You might be looking forward to working, falling in love, marrying, raising a family. You are told that, as graduates, you should expect to find a job paying so much, where your hours are so much, where your responsibilities are so much.

That is what is expected of you. And if you live up to it, it will be an awful waste.

If you expect that, you will be limiting yourself. You will be living your life according to boundaries set by average people. I have nothing against average people. But no one should aspire to be them. And you don’t need years of education by the best minds in Singapore to prepare you to be average.

What you should prepare for is mess. Life’s a mess. You are not entitled to expect anything from it. Life is not fair. Everything does not balance out in the end. Life happens, and you have no control over it. Good and bad things happen to you day by day, hour by hour, moment by moment. Your degree is a poor armour against fate.

Don’t expect anything. Erase all life expectancies. Just live. Your life is over as of today. At this point in time, you have grown as tall as you will ever be, you are physically the fittest you will ever be in your entire life and you are probably looking the best that you will ever look. This is as good as it gets. It is all downhill from here. Or up. No one knows.

What does this mean for you? It is good that your life is over.

Since your life is over, you are free. Let me tell you the many wonderful things that you can do when you are free.

The most important is this: do not work.

Work is anything that you are compelled to do. By its very nature, it is undesirable.

Work kills. The Japanese have a term “Karoshi”, which means death from overwork. That’s the most dramatic form of how work can kill. But it can also kill you in more subtle ways. If you work, then day by day, bit by bit, your soul is chipped away, disintegrating until there’s nothing left. A rock has been ground into sand and dust.

There’s a common misconception that work is necessary. You will meet people working at miserable jobs. They tell you they are “making a living”. No, they’re not. They’re dying, frittering away their fast-extinguishing lives doing things which are, at best, meaningless and, at worst, harmful.

People will tell you that work ennobles you, that work lends you a certain dignity. Work makes you free. The slogan “Arbeit macht frei” was placed at the entrances to a number of Nazi concentration camps. Utter nonsense.

Do not waste the vast majority of your life doing something you hate so that you can spend the small remainder sliver of your life in modest comfort. You may never reach that end anyway.

Resist the temptation to get a job. Instead, play. Find something you enjoy doing. Do it. Over and over again. You will become good at it for two reasons: you like it, and you do it often. Soon, that will have value in itself.

I like arguing, and I love language. So, I became a litigator. I enjoy it and I would do it for free. If I didn’t do that, I would’ve been in some other type of work that still involved writing fiction – probably a sports journalist.

So what should you do? You will find your own niche. I don’t imagine you will need to look very hard. By this time in your life, you will have a very good idea of what you will want to do. In fact, I’ll go further and say the ideal situation would be that you will not be able to stop yourself pursuing your passions. By this time you should know what your obsessions are. If you enjoy showing off your knowledge and feeling superior, you might become a teacher.

Find that pursuit that will energise you, consume you, become an obsession. Each day, you must rise with a restless enthusiasm. If you don’t, you are working.

Most of you will end up in activities which involve communication. To those of you I have a second message: be wary of the truth. I’m not asking you to speak it, or write it, for there are times when it is dangerous or impossible to do those things. The truth has a great capacity to offend and injure, and you will find that the closer you are to someone, the more care you must take to disguise or even conceal the truth. Often, there is great virtue in being evasive, or equivocating. There is also great skill. Any child can blurt out the truth, without thought to the consequences. It takes great maturity to appreciate the value of silence.

In order to be wary of the truth, you must first know it. That requires great frankness to yourself. Never fool the person in the mirror.

I have told you that your life is over, that you should not work, and that you should avoid telling the truth. I now say this to you: be hated.

It’s not as easy as it sounds. Do you know anyone who hates you? Yet every great figure who has contributed to the human race has been hated, not just by one person, but often by a great many. That hatred is so strong it has caused those great figures to be shunned, abused, murdered and in one famous instance, nailed to a cross.

One does not have to be evil to be hated. In fact, it’s often the case that one is hated precisely because one is trying to do right by one’s own convictions. It is far too easy to be liked, one merely has to be accommodating and hold no strong convictions. Then one will gravitate towards the centre and settle into the average. That cannot be your role. There are a great many bad people in the world, and if you are not offending them, you must be bad yourself. Popularity is a sure sign that you are doing something wrong.

The other side of the coin is this: fall in love.

I didn’t say “be loved”. That requires too much compromise. If one changes one’s looks, personality and values, one can be loved by anyone.

Rather, I exhort you to love another human being. It may seem odd for me to tell you this. You may expect it to happen naturally, without deliberation. That is false. Modern society is anti-love. We’ve taken a microscope to everyone to bring out their flaws and shortcomings. It far easier to find a reason not to love someone, than otherwise. Rejection requires only one reason. Love requires complete acceptance. It is hard work – the only kind of work that I find palatable.

Loving someone has great benefits. There is admiration, learning, attraction and something which, for the want of a better word, we call happiness. In loving someone, we become inspired to better ourselves in every way. We learn the truth worthlessness of material things. We celebrate being human. Loving is good for the soul.

Loving someone is therefore very important, and it is also important to choose the right person. Despite popular culture, love doesn’t happen by chance, at first sight, across a crowded dance floor. It grows slowly, sinking roots first before branching and blossoming. It is not a silly weed, but a mighty tree that weathers every storm.
You will find, that when you have someone to love, that the face is less important than the brain, and the body is less important than the heart.

You will also find that it is no great tragedy if your love is not reciprocated. You are not doing it to be loved back. Its value is to inspire you.

Finally, you will find that there is no half-measure when it comes to loving someone. You either don’t, or you do with every cell in your body, completely and utterly, without reservation or apology. It consumes you, and you are reborn, all the better for it.

Don’t work. Avoid telling the truth. Be hated. Love someone.

Kathleen Reardon: Offense? Insult? The Firing of Juan Williams

Kathleen Reardon: Offense? Insult? The Firing of Juan Williams

The Prison System doesn't work.

There are a million reasons why the prison system both in Australia and the US needs to be seriously overhauled.

The people of our statewide communications system and newsletter, United for No Injustice, Oppression or Neglect (UNION) do not recognize the unlawful ban of the media from taxpayer financed prisons. 

This ban violates the First Amendment of our Constitution.

One of our very talented members who visits Death Row, Jane Drake has, in an act of rebellion which could end her visits, drawn the cages built in 2001 by our new CDC Director, Jeanne Woodford.  These were also approved by our California Legislature as a constructive use of your tax dollars.

If you're not outraged over these cages and the visiting "system" that is punitive to 6000 Californians who are degraded there each year, then you're not really paying attention.

Locking inmates in cages has never been and never will be a crime deterrent but locking families in cages is an unspeakable human rights atrocity. We urge everyone to plan to testify against the appointment of Jeanne Woodford as the new CDC Director when her confirmation hearing comes up because a person who would participate in this type of psychological torture does not have the capacity to be a real prison reformer.

Here are some startling facts about the visiting cages and Woodford's "system."

AVERAGE SIZE OF VISIT CAGES* 4'x7'  Except for Cage #  10 which is 5'x8'

Visiting began in the Cages in February, 2001.  Constructed by Jeanne Woodford

THE CAGES WERE CONSTRUCTED DUE TO A SCUFFLE BY TWO INMATES WHO WERE ARMED WITH A TOOTHBRUSH AND A PENCIL. THE GUARDS ARE SAID BY WITNESSES TO HAVE STABBED AN INMATE AFTER THE SCUFFLE ENDED.   BEFORE THAT IT WAS BLOODLESS.

Family members account of what happened to cause visitor cages to be built.

"Two attorneys who were sitting right there, one with his client who was attacked, said a make shift pencil or toothbrush was the only weapon, but the inmate was not wounded until the Guard's came in. Officer Porton had control immediately, he maced the two attackers of another inmate and had the visitors and inmates down on the ground by the time the Guard's arrived.  There was NO BLOOD until the guards came in and stabbed the inmate according to the lawyers who witnessed it.  Then came the cages."

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LOCKED IN THESE VISITING CAGES WITH SUPPOSEDLY MURDEROUS INMATES EACH YEAR?

Assuming that ten friends, family, attorneys visit the 600 men and women on death row, 6000 Californians have had the door locked behind them when they visit with an inmate. If these cages are for the protection of families, could they really get out in time if an inmate "lost it" while they were locked inside?  Isn't this logic faulty?

WHAT ARE IN THE CAGES?

Two plastic chair and a low table which cannot be moved under any circumstances, a trash can with a liner.  Children are allowed to bring in one coloring book but the floors are filthy, the tables are too low, so they can only place it on their laps. The discomfort from sitting two hours in the same position is very great and oppressive.

WHAT IF A PERSON NEEDS TO USE THE BATHROOM WHILE LOCKED IN THESE CAGES

If anyone needs to use the bathroom, the visit is usually terminated.  Once a desperate inmate urinated in a cup when no guard was available and he lost his visits indefinitely.  There is an elderly guard in the room who often sleeps through his shift and doesn't always open the doors in a timely fashion.

ARE THE CHILDREN WHO VISIT ALSO LOCKED IN THE CAGES?

Yes.  The floors are filthy.  The guards constantly harass the mothers and tell them to keep their children quiet.   The families are treated as if they are garbage and also in prison.

IS THERE ANY PRIVACY FOR DISCUSSING URGENT LEGAL MATTERS?

No.  The noise level is high and since the chairs cannot be moved, whispering is impractical.  The visitors on either side can hear everything that is said so there is zero privacy to discuss legal cases and other important matters.

BESIDES A COLORING BOOK, WHAT ELSE CAN BE BROUGHT INTO THE CAGES?

One visit to the vending machines is allowed before the visit. The food is over-priced junk food for the most part.  If it gets spilled, there is no opportunity to leave the cage to replace it, which happens frequently.  A bible or other religious book is allowed.  Death Row inmates are never allowed to attend chapel.  This is a violation of almost every religious doctrine.

FAMILIES REACT TO THE OPPRESSION OF THE CAGES AND VISITING DEATH ROW. 

"Visiting my loved one on death row creates such depression that it has ruined my health, pursuit of happiness for two decades now." 

R.D.

"My husband had to tell his dying father good bye on the phone twice because visiting is impossible for the disabled" 

G.L.

"With only a few cages available for visits, my hands and wrists go numb having to redial for up to two hours to get an appointment.  There is almost no chance to get through." 

O.T.

"CDC is slicing families apart.  I used to be able to visit a couple of times per week to help keep my son supported in San Quentin's hell on earth existence, but with the cages and visiting regulations that is no longer possible. He will eventually be put to death and I want to spend as much time as possible with him because he is mentally ill and this is torture." 

B.R.

"The victims rights group and law enforcement unions are vengeful upon the families of mostly mentally ill inmates on death row.  They want to hurt us in every way possible and Woodford and the Legislature has assisted in this campaign of hate. We are innocent victims of crime just wanting to spend as much time with our loved ones as possible before they are murdered by the State." 

Q.V.

"I am an elderly mother.  My only crime is that I love my son.  The State of California wants to torture me too and has made visiting very difficult for me.  There is never a visit available for me since the cages limit the number of people who can get in to just a handful and now only two days a week cuts visits in half.  Two hours was enough before but now it is impossible." 

A.N. 

"The water is poison.  A bottle of water costs $1 for visitors to buy and the food gives us cramps and diarrhea, food vendors are always late, the coffee cups have ants in them, the food area is filthy, there is a time limit to get into the cages but only two microwaves to warm the food."

J.D.

"The temperature of the room is so hot that we must call out to get one fan turned on, the newer visitors do not know of the days when we could sit and eat or play a game beside our loved ones with no cages." 

V.R. 

 

    "WHEN KEVIN COOPER WAS NEAR EXECUTION, HE WAS ALWAYS PUT IN A FRONT CAGE BY THE OFFICE, AND HAD TO ENDURE THE QUESTIONS OF ALL. 

      BUT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T CARE, THEY WANT OUR MEN AND WOMEN DEAD. IT IS A "WAY TO HEAL" THEY ALWAYS SAY,, BUT THOSE WHO SEE IT ARE NEVER THE SAME,,,,,HOW COULD YOU BE WHEN YOU WATCH GUARDS SNUFF OUT A LIVING PERSON, AND YOU CAN ONLY VIEW IT AND NOT STOP IT ,,,,,,,,ONLY EVERYONE KNOWS IT BRINGS ON MORE PAIN FOR ALL CONCERNED, 

     REVENGE IS  HATE, AND HURTS THE ONE WHO SEEKS IT.  

HOW CAN A PERSON WATCH A MURDER OF A HUMAN AND THINK IT IS OK, FOR SOMEONE MURDERING THEIR LOVED ONE? "

L.S.

"The guards in the office up front, snack and eat and read magazines and talk on the phone all day. This is the "cushy" job in there, and they are the ones who often give the wrong passes and drivers licenses to the wrong visitor. Some people have gone home to LA with the wrong Driver's license and have had to return them.  The bottom line is, it is not that  "DANGEROUS  PLACE"  the CDC would like to keep the public afraid of and the guards don't deserve that much money."

J.M.

"Many of the inmates were drug users, and now that they are "sober", they are clean and act very courteous to all. Or they acted out their mental illness and are now getting medication which controls their out-of-control behavior.  Had they been medically well in the first place the crimes would not have happened.  It makes more sense to focus on prevention than torture.

    The main friction and troubles are when the CDC makes cuts and changes to their programs,,,,,,,,,,or treats them like dogs,,,,,,or worse,,,,,only then does the CDC see trouble, and they know it. 

    It is a known fact that Death Row is less troublesome then the Mainline convicts. They have only a few good things left in their lives, visiting with family, and yard time. Some are so depressed that they commit suicide, and some never go outside at all. These "crazy killers" are often seen crocheting an afghan for their mom! And some do beautiful art work, write stories, play the guitar, to pass the time away,, but violence is at a minimum on death row."

J.V.

"We who visit are perhaps more scrutinized at San Quentin, there  have been few escapes at San Quentin overall, some they figure it was guard assisted and these did not happen during visits."

R.S. 

"Due to death row being in the mode of killing its captives,  what are they looking for as we must pass each week through not one but two metal detectors take our shoes off twice INSIDE the gates?  The men are strip searched twice at their cell, and in the back holding room each time we visit.  Full degrading body searches. 

J.F.

"Critendon, San Quentin's public info man/second generation guard, who seems to delight in announcing an execution carried out is also saying we need another new death row, just to keep up with so many coming on a fast pace to Death Row. Critendon is a murderer at heart, a sadistic man who loves his job of killing the mentally ill.  People who take these jobs have a certain sickness of their own but have found a legal and socially acceptable way to kill representing the taxpayers."

V.W.

"On Death Row we have sickness, AIDS, and hepatitis terrible illness. We rarely see the dying in visiting.  Our loved ones do though.  They become numb to any feelings when things change for them.  Due to all the mental illnesses on death row, and those who know they are guilty of acting out. People condemned to die with no hope grow despondent. They no longer go to yard, and sit in often -a filthy cell, depressed waiting to die. 

We have suicides and fights some times ,but you never see the tiny back page news reports about it.  Life has little meaning to some on death row, and yet others do well to stay fit and active, enjoying what days, months, years they have left to live, while waiting to be put to death in such a wicked way.

  But some have prison palor, that they look like they re half dead already. Some guards in visiting also, are so full of hatred for those on death row that it shows on their faces.

I have seen several hundred at guards at least over the years in there, some flirt with the ladies, and some are surly and mean. Can you imagine how it feels to a death row man to see a guard flirt with his girl or wife?  

For this reason, many women visitors won't look up ,attend to getting foods and speak only to the inmate."

T.J. 

 

"The visitors are mostly peaceful people, innocent crime victims but due to the strain , there is friction every year, telling a woman or mom or dad, that their son or husband is going to die in the chamber, is brutal on them. 

I know most women are on anti depressants by way of their doctors, they must keep their jobs secret at all times, those with the strength to hold one. Due to the hate and prejudice surrounding anyone or the family members of an inmate who gets the "penalty of Death". 

C.A. 

 

"Filth is a good way to describe San Quentin.  Woodford has no health consciousness whatsoever, so this is bad news now that she is CDC Director. 

There is one changing table in the women's rest room for babies which is dirty, dirty, dirty."

L.M. 

 

"It is an odd feeling , to see  our barren donated Christmas tree is no longer  decorated.  It used to light up the faces of even the most hardened inmate. 

Some guards try to be friendly, but that look full of questions is usually on their faces. The one guard being kept in there is the one who is retired military, gray hair, in the center cage, pacing back and forth, when he is not sleeping on his stool. He was the one who pepper sprayed the fighters, that one fight, that they blame for these awful caged visits. ONE fight, set up, rival gang members and we have thousands of days of separation and torment.

The men still keep it a safe place in there, due to wanting to visit. It is to some, all they have left in life. Many are solemn and remorseful, and pray with their loved ones, on a regular basis. We do, it is the only shared sacred time together. Some times a guard will interrupt when our heads are bowed , questioning what we are doing??? Funny, prayer looks pretty safe I would say."

D.F. 

  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  

Death Row Costs Millions of Taxpayer Dollars But Does Not Deter Crime 

There are no statistics anywhere that prisons, jails and the death penalty are actual deterrents to crime.

What these barbaric practices are  is a way to punish the mentally ill and addicts who have acted out their illnesses.  They are revenge but not actual crime solutions.

Look at just some of the money we spend on revenge because law enforcement unions can successfully organize voting groups and elect their own candidates.

-Each murder case (capital case) costs at least $1,000,000 to prosecute.  A study by Columbia University discovered that even after all that money spent, 87% of the cases are flawed. 

-The land upon which San Quentin sits is worth several million dollars.  The prison is old and decrepit.  Tearing it down and selling the land would help greatly toward the budget crisis. Why are the Republican politicians fighting this move?  Death row is a waste of taxpayer money and shouldn't we really be giving the mentally ill medical treatment instead of killing them for acting out their illnesses?

-The human toll of executing the mentally ill is immeasurable.  It cripples the entire family for life emotionally, financially, and ends their productivity and pursuit of happiness.  There are 6000 family members attached to those on death row who observe and experience continuous oppression and psychological torment. Families of inmates are innocent crime victims and shouldn't be punished in a sane society.

-The cost of an execution exceeds that of life imprisonment.  An execution is pre-meditated murder and delivers a message to our young people that murder is a solution when a wrong has been committed.  Blood does not wash out blood and this is a bad example for the government who claims to be against killing to set for its citizens.

-There have been hundreds of people released off death row who are totally innocent. With the corruption in California's courts and the startling 87% rate of flawed cases identified in the Columbia University study, it makes no sense for the taxpayers to finance a failed system of injustice.  This isn't about justice, it's about law enforcement jobs and we need to take a stand against it to protect the innocent and to heal the mentally ill who have acted out.

B. Cayenne Bird, Director 

United for No Injustice, Oppression or Neglect  

I'll be visiting San Quentin's Death Row in December.  I'll be subject to strip searches and other strict rules.  It will be interesting to see for myself exactly how bad it is there.

An eye for an eye

Recently, I have become pen pals with two American death row inmates.  One resides in San Quentin Prison, California, and the other in Sci Greene in Waynesburg, PA. Both of them are men, and both have been found guilty by a court of law of terrible crimes and sentenced to death.


When I tell people this, I get a mixed reaction.  My more liberal minded friends are ok with me writing letters, and are even a little curious.   Some however, think it is entirely abhorrent.  I do not know their specific reasons for thinking this, because pushing the issue leads to unnecessary tension. I am writing to these men (which I will refer to them as, not as prisoners, convicts, murderers, rapists, or any other title) for a number of reasons.  Namely, because I am studying psychology and criminology in the hope of working with people in the prison system, and perhaps also with victims of crime.  By communicating with people that have been convicted of crimes and are serving time in a prison is very insightful for these purposes.  Additionally, I intentionally selected people on death row to write to, because I am resolutely against the death penalty.  Of course, by writing to these men, I cannot change the laws nor save them from the gas chambers, but I can allow them something beyond the concrete confinement that serves as their home.  As my pen pals have written, their family are long gone and as is the case for one of the men, he has not received a visitation from anyone in five years.  These men are no longer considered people.  They are the "condemned" and are even listed as such under prison documentation.  


I can certainly understand why people may believe that those on death row deserve to be forgotten, neglected, and unworthy of having someone to converse with on pieces of paper.  These men have allegedly done heinous things, and I say allegedly because we all know that the legal system is flawed.  I myself have served on the jury in a murder trial and I know how easily members of juries can be swayed by their peers or personal bias.  The woman we convicted received a 23 year sentence with a minimum of 18 years to be served.  If Australia had the death penalty, I would have had to excuse myself from jury duty, as I could not in good conscience send another human being to their death.


For the religious minded, the bible supposedly says something about "an eye for an eye".  I haven't read the good book, so I cannot offer my interpretation of such a statement.  Someone I admire greatly once said "An eye for an eye would make the whole world blind" which is how I see the issue.  Who are we as people to decide who should live or die?  Yes, I realise the hypocrisy in this statement, as convicted murderers have made that decision.  However, to kill a person is generally agreed amongst cultures to be morally and legally wrong.  A culture that metes out the death penalty for crimes such as murder is publicly announcing that killing is wrong, yet proceeds to carry out the same act in the name of justice.  What kind of justice is that?


Crimes should be punished.  Absolutely.  If you murder or rape someone, I will happily lock you up and throw away the key.  I have no qualms about that.  But I will not be party to a system that cannot see the injustice in sentencing people to death.  Especially when there is countless evidence that shows innocent people have been executed.  There also appears to be no discretion with murder cases in the United States of America.  If you kill someone, you automatically are eligible for the death sentence.  Below is an excerpt from an online article that was published about the person I write to in PA.  I have removed his name for obvious reasons.

~ ****** Should Not Be On Death-Row ~

APRIL 11 EXECUTION

WILL NOT HAPPEN

    “None,” was Attorney Merrill Spahn’s response to my question by phone this morning as to the odds of ****** being executed on April 11, 2006.  “He has a multitude of appeals,” he said.  Spahn said the only way he could theoretically be executed on April 11 is if ****** were to forgo all possible appeals and he said he found that “very unlikely.”

    Deputy Public Defender Spahn and Assistant Public Defender James Gratton were ******'s attorneys in his murder trial in 2001.  They no longer represent him.  Spahn said his defense is now most likely being handled by the Capital Unit of Federal Appeals based in Philadelphia.

    There are many, many serious problems with this being a death penalty case.   

    To begin with, I am going to take you to two recent, “similar” incidents in which the men involved were not even charged with attempted homicide.  And, they were very “lucky” that their victims survived. 

    One was only two weeks ago.  On February 1, 2006 the Intell had this story, “Man accused of 2nd attack on ex-girlfriend.” Akeem Washington, for the second time in less than a month, seriously assaulted his ex-girlfriend and this time was trying to kill her.  The article says, “Police say Washington sliced Perez’s throat with a knife, leaving a 3-inch cut.” 

    Was Washington charged with attempted homicide?  No. He was charged with, “aggravated assault, burglary, simple assault, terroristic threats, tampering with or fabricating evidence and intimidation of a victim.”

    If this woman had died he would have been charged with murder.  Would he get the death penalty?

    The second story: “Woman critically hurt in beating” from the New Era on September 5, 2005.  The article is in archives but the opening sentence is still there for you to read, “A 36-year-old Green Street man viciously beat his girlfriend with a small baseball bat early today and then threw the woman onto the street, rendering her unconscious, city police said.”  The article goes on to say she was in critical condition at Lancaster General Hospital. 

    Steven Morgan, the perpetrator, did this in front of witnesses.  The article says, “Several witnesses saw Morgan chase the woman down the 500 block of Green Street at about 2:20 a.m. today, Bernot  [Police Officer Phil Bernot] said.  When Morgan caught up with the woman, he struck her about four or five times on the head with a 16-inch wooden mini-bat, police said. As the woman lay on her back, Morgan grabbed her by the front of her shirt and slammed her back and head down onto the street, the officer was told.”

     Was Morgan charged with attempted homicide?  No.  According to the article, he was charged with, “aggravated assault (domestic violence) and resisting arrest.”

    If this woman had died he would have been charged with murder.  Would he get the death penalty?

    Today’s Intell article on ******, “Lancaster city man is slated for execution,” says he “repeatedly refused to cooperate with his attorneys, Assistant Public Defender James Gratton and Deputy Defender Merrill Spahn.  Against their advice, ****** took the stand in his own defense.” 

    That doesn’t mean he should get the death penalty. 

    There is another very disturbing side to this story as relayed in the same article.  It says, “First Assistant District Attorney Heidi Eakin told jurors ****** had been arrested three years before Taylor’s murder for an unrelated violent crime.  In 1997, ****** was arrested for attempted murder, kidnapping, rape and weapons violations, Eakin said.  He served 2 years in an Ohio prison on a reduced charge of assault and was paroled in 2000.”

    There is something terribly wrong in that information.  If Eakin told his jurors he was arrested for attempted murder, kidnapping, rape and weapons violations then why did he only serve 2 years?  Were the jurors made aware of the final court sentence and what crimes he was actually convicted of?  Or were they only told what he was initially “arrested for”?  He only served two years.  This was highly incendiary and untruthful information that was provided to the jury.

    The death penalty in this case was arbitrary and groundless, based on erroneous information from the District Attorney’s Office.  This man should not be facing execution.  Yes, his crime was horrific.  Unfortunately, there are a lot of horrific crimes.  The two mentioned above in this article were horrific and yet neither of those men were even charged with attempted homicide.  ******’s case is not a death penalty case.  He should not be on death-row.

A similar opinion was recently aired by now-retired former Justice John Paul Stevens:

"I thought at the time ... that if the universe of defendants eligible for the death penalty is sufficiently narrow so that you can be confident that the defendant really merits that severe punishment, that the death penalty was appropriate," he says. But, over the years, "the court constantly expanded the cases eligible for the death penalty, so that the underlying premise for my vote has disappeared, in a sense."

Additionally, people are being executed despite having sufficiently low IQ scores to be excused from the death penalty.  In the recent case of Teresa Lewis, her execution went ahead in spite of protests from lawyers, celebrities and others who argued that she should have been given clemency because of her low IQ. Under US law, anyone with an IQ of 70 avoids the death penalty. Lewis was judged to have an IQ of 72.  It is common knowledge that IQ tests are not an exact science and are a rough guide only. Often, psychologists administer these tests to children who are intellectually disabled and whose parents require financial assistance from the government.  The government also has a cut off point for financial aid, and in the instance where a child scores 2-3 points above this cut off point, a psychologist will generally write a letter reinforcing the inadequacy of such a test and the fallibility of the system.  9 times out of 10 the government will be compelled to agree with the psychologist, however because of the difficulty of contesting the system, many psychologists now refuse to conduct IQ tests for the purposes of financial aid.  I suspect there is a similar crisis amongst psychologists who must administer the test to determine one's eligibility for the death penalty.

Having sat on a jury for five weeks and seen the effects of serious crime on the family and friends of victims, I do not say any of this lightly.  Each day when I took my seat in the jury booth, I had to look at the daughter of the deceased, who was my age and had clearly suffered greatly as a result of her loss.  I remember as clear as day, the moment when my jury's foreman announced that we had reached a verdict of guilty of murder.  The reaction from the victim's daughter is one I see replayed in my mind every single day.  And keeping that image in my mind helps me live with the knowledge that I sent someone to prison for a very long time.  And it helps me push through the difficult times with my studies, because if I succeed and manage to work with prisoners and criminals, perhaps I can rehabilitate people so they do not commit crimes again, and then no one will have to feel the way this woman did.  Even better, would be to gain sufficient understanding from people already incarcerated so as to be able to prevent crimes.  

Knowing the reasons I have for writing to and visiting these people on death row allows me to look the doubters in the eye and gives me the strength to do what I do.  I grieve for the families and friends of the victims of my pen pals, and in no way do I excuse their behaviour.  But they are human beings and I will continue to treat them as such.

Addendum:
Firstly, I'm a little overwhelmed by the response to this post.  Thanks to people from as far away as Iraq for reading it, and thanks for the positive feedback.  I expected a far more negative response.


At any rate, after posting a link to the blog on facebook and Google Reader, etc. I added a comment in regards to there being a lack of wealth on death row.  I did so as a reply to someone who pointed out that in the case of sociopaths or other types of personality disorder, rehabilitation is unlikely to be an option.  My response was thus: Sociopaths and the like will always be sociopaths, but in a lot of cases, the people on death row are without personality disorders of any kind. They come from poverty and are without education. To them, carrying guns and knives is as normal to us as carrying mobile phones and daily planners. 

You won't find anyone with money on death row.

While in the blog I expressed my own opinion (the whole point of the article) and mixed it with fact, this additional comment I paraphrased from one of my pen pals.  I am not being ignorant, disrespectful or anything of that nature towards people of low socio-economic standing.  And I am certainly not saying that ALL poor people become murderers and rapists (which I was accused of doing).  I'm saying that for many people on death row, this is simply the case.  Just as I rarely leave home without my phone in my bag, for many people, a weapon is rarely left at home.

I completely understand that money often buys freedom or reduced sentences, but we cannot neglect the arrest rates which overwhelmingly tip the scales towards poorer people.  My goal here is to help people, not alienate them.

I'm not on death row, and I'm guessing neither are you.  So we'll have to accept this observation from someone who is.  If you want to continue to argue the point, feel free to pop into San Quentin and state your case there.