Twenty years (or so) ago, a woman named Jennifer Thompson fingered a man named Ronald Cotton as her rapist. He served eleven years until DNA testing determined that he was, in fact, innocent. Two years after his release, he met the woman whose testimony had jailed him, and told her in no uncertain terms that he forgave her.
I think that’s a hëll of a thing. I don’t know if I would be capable of doing what he did. The two of them have written a book together called “Picking Cotton
It also underscores my continued opposition to the death penalty. Who knows how many people have been unjustly executed, but I have to think that if that number is “one” or above, that is more than too many already.
PAD
• 
Yeah, I don’t think I could be that forgiving. I guess forgiveness is what keeps you sane after something like that.
It depends. Eyewitness evidence is notoriously unreliable but given way more credence by juries than most anything else. If a victim honestly thinks I look like the guy who did it I can’t hate them for that. (I met someone in college who could have been my brother–thank God he never knocked off a bank).
Now if she made stuff up to make her testimony more convincing or if the prosecutor was a Nifong type. no, there’s no way I’d forgive. I’d hound them to the end of time if I could.
I don’t know if it’s his capacity for forgiveness that impresses me, mostly because as far as I know she did nothing deliberately wrong (she did not make up the story of being raped and did not finger Mr. Cotton out of any desire to get a particular person. She honestly believed she had the right man.) No, what impresses me is that he is so compassionate and seems to have so little bitterness, after an ordeal that would probably drive me to a place too dark to come out of it as that good a person. That seems to me to be a far greater aspect of his soul than the capacity to forgive someone who meant no harm, even though great harm came about through their actions.
At any rate, it’s nice to see something good came out of the OJ Simpson trial (That’s where Mr. Cotton first heard about DNA testing). It’s a crime that North Carolina only offered him 5000 dollars for 11 years of incarceration. Obviously we can’t break open the bank for people who are mistakenly incarcerated (if it isn’t due to negligence or malfeasance) but surely there should be some way to get them back on their feet. we spend a fortune on rehabilitating criminals who will likely never amount to anything, how about something for a guy who had a big chunk of his life taken away through no fault of his own?
Somebody close to me was raped on an army base over 20 years ago and the anger, fear and hate that she has lived with is horrible.
I plan on getting that book as well. I heard them speak on NPR (I think it was last Friday) and they really made me think. You hear so much negative news and it’s easy to become convinced that human beings are the most evil and vicious animals to have ever roamed the earth. We need more stories like theirs to remind us that, conversely, human beings are also capable of enormous acts of fogiveness and redemption.
The number is much more than “one.”
Sources?
I’m reminded of JMS’ statement regarding the Babylon 5 episode “Passing Through Gethsemane” that he cannot forgive. “Which makes the notion of writing a character who CAN forgive momentarily attractive.”
Like Bill, I’m also impressed with Mr. Cotton’s lack of bitterness. That’s probably very rare.
I’m also going to have to pick up a copy of that book.
Rick
Obviously we can’t break open the bank for people who are mistakenly incarcerated (if it isn’t due to negligence or malfeasance) but surely there should be some way to get them back on their feet. we spend a fortune on rehabilitating criminals who will likely never amount to anything, how about something for a guy who had a big chunk of his life taken away through no fault of his own?
A G.I. Bill for the wrongly incarcerated, perhaps?
60 Minutes (I think) covered this or something similar to it Sunday evening. I didn’t see it, but heard it on a local radio station while I was driving.
The entire process of showing victims a mugshot book and a lineup can be too easily manipulated by investigators EVEN WHEN DONE SUBCONSCIOUSLY.
‘Who knows how many people have been unjustly executed, but I have to think that if that number is anything above “one,” that is more than too many already.’
Do you mean that “one” is ok to wrongly execute or did you mean to write ‘anything above “zero”‘?
“I think that’s a hëll of a thing.”
Actually, it’s the opposite. It was Cotton’s turning to Jesus Christ in prison and the grace and mercy that came into his life from that relationship that allowed him to become a man of incredible forgiveness. Before he turned to Christ, Cotton was in prison making a knife so that he could kill the man who actually committed the rape. His father urged him to seek Jesus Christ instead.
Does that make Cotton less extradinary? Not at all. Many Christians, including the one who is typing these words, struggle to forgive things that are completely insignificant compared to what Cotton went through. He is an inspiration. I pray that one day I may have the grace and mercy that he does. But he didn’t just get that way because he decided to suddenly become a loving, forgiving guy. He turned his life over to Christ, and that decision had a PROFOUND impact on him. It was life-changing. It enabled him to love others in a way that he was previously incapable of.
I just wanted to point that out.
And PAD, your point on captial punishment is well taken. Far and away the most convincing argument I hear from people who oppose the death penalty is when they point out the inadequacies, unfairness, and outright corruption in our justice system today.
Depends who the one is…
Yeah, what I meant to write is “one or above.” I’ve fixed it in the original post.
PAD
I’m pro-death penalty in theory, but in practice, I think there should be an indefinite moratorium on it unless/until those convicted of murder are convicted on the basis of evidence or testimony that is so airtight that the possibility of executing an innocent person is zero. I don’t have a problem with executing a guilty person morally, because I do believe that it can be justice, at least in some circumstances.
Beyond that, a moratorium could also be justified by the cost of executing someone, but the only moral argument that gives me pause in terms of capital punishment is the possibility of killing an innocent.
Nonetheless, I respect people who are anti-death penalty, I think that if the murdered one’s loved ones are against it, it’s one good reason why I would consider not executing the killer, even if he were known to be guilty. I’m also disgusted by that segment of the pro-death penalty crowd who attack those against it, and at Nitcentral.com, I once had to defend an anti-dp acquaintance from a pro-dp jerk who accused my acquaintance of being “anti-justice” simply because he was against the death penalty.
I also enjoyed reading your “Crazy Eight” story, Peter. It was one of your best, and I’m glad you stuck to your guns in the face of the churls who criticized you for it. 🙂
OT: Are you going to put up a Watchmen review. Was looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the movie.
I’ve become more leery of the death penalty over the years. I still think it is better to have the option, but as mentioned above, more controls are needed. Suppose DNA evidence proves the assault? Then, the death penalty shouldn’t necessarily be discarded.
John Grisham published a book called “The Innocent Man” a few years ago that talks about a man in Oklahoma who was put on death row for years until he was proved innocent. It’s well worth the read.
There was a rather wonderful editorial in an edition of Private Eye (British satirical magazine) about 15-20 years ago when various people were found not to have been seventies terrorists after all, from memory:
“The damage to the British judicial system caused up the release of framed terrorism suspects demonstrates the need to restore the death penalty, for the following reasons:
1) Were there a death penalty then terrorists would be less inclined to commit atrocities.
2) Were there a death penalty then the police would be more rigourous in their investigations and resist the urge to bend the evidence, knowing the impact such actions might have.
3) Juries would weigh the evidence more carefully, knowing that if they lightly accept things that don’t feel quite right they might be condeming and innocent man
4) The suspects would be dead now, and unable to make a fuss”
You have to know that it’s more than one already.
However some people consider that the death penalty is too valuable a tool to stop using it just because a few innocent people get caught in it.
And then there are cases when one wishes there were.
Up in Canada we had a yuppie couple (Bernardo/Homolka) convicted of multiple rapes and murders in the early 90s.
While it is true that justice has been known to err, even when faced with DNA evidence and one giving evidence against the other, the fact that they FILMED THEMSELVES raping and murdering at least two of their victims pretty much makes it an open and shut death penalty case … if we had the death penalty here which, unfortunately, we don’t. To quote a certain Watchmen character, “Human beings are arrested. Mad dogs are just put down.”
Working in the prison system, I have seen many different kinds of men. Some are good men, some are horrible, some are mature, some are childish, and some are utterly insane. But one thing I have noticed, from talking to countless convicts is this:
Nobody is in prison who didn’t, in some way, shape, or form, deserve it.
The amount of actual time a person does is disproportionate to the actual number of crimes and damage that person has wrought. You don’t do time, typically, for each and every charge you initially are charged with. You typically get guys with concurrent sentences and whatnot, and guys from big cities tend to be doing sentences that don’t match up with the kind of time a guy in a rural county has to do, because smaller jurisdictions tend to be much harsher than overloaded metropolitian areas. You can beat a murder charge in Atlanta. You try that šhìŧ up in Hall or Haversham county, and you’ll never see the free world again. Sometimes the biggest, heftiest charge is pushed through and other, teritary charges arn’t pressed, because when you’re talking about Life, 2-3 for a petty felony is small change.
But everyone in prison that I have had contact with, they always were doing something they shouldn’t have been fûçkìņg with. Nobody is there because they were singing too loud in the choir. Mistakes do happen, and some people do get railroaded by the system or a vindictive ex or whatever… but without fail, each inmate I know deserves to be there, and they’ll admit it, too.
Now, guys who get the death penalty and are exonerated by DNA evidence, ok, they got lucky, but don’t be mistaken. They might not have raped her, but what were they doing in the area? They might not have shot the store clerk or robbed the bank, but why were they in the car to drive the guy who did the crime?
My point is, situations like Cotton’s are VERY FEW and VERY FAR BETWEEN. And I’m certain he was no angel prior to incarceration. But that’s neither here nor there. I’m glad he’s exonerated, and hopefully he can make due with what life has left for him.
But I betcha he won’t be putting himself into questionable situations or associating with questionable people ever again.
Sam said:
“Nobody is in prison who didn’t, in some way, shape, or form, deserve it. ”
What a completely naive, even stupid, statement.
It is illogical thinking, along the lines of: A guy was killed in a car accident, therefore he must have been speeding.
Now, guys who get the death penalty and are exonerated by DNA evidence, ok, they got lucky, but don’t be mistaken. They might not have raped her, but what were they doing in the area?
Are you serious, or are you being sarcastic, pretending to portray a certain mindset?
On the off chance that you are serious…you are assuming that the innocent person was actually in the area during the rape. Not so–they just don’t have an iron tight alibi to prove they weren’t there. Which would describe most of my days after work–“I was home with my wife.” is unlikely to sway many juries since my aforementioned wife is the only witness to same and why would they trust anyone crazy enough to marry me?
Good grief, don’t ever be on a jury.
This reminds me of the line from the fan film TROOPS: “TROOPS is filmed on location with the men of the Imperial Forces. All suspects are guilty–Period! Otherwise, they wouldn’t be suspects, would they?”
I think that generally the anti-DP crowd underestimates the damaging social effect of legislation that allows murderers and rapists to get off the hook comparatively light.
Brazil is a country that is infamous for police brutality. And I think this brutality exists for many reasons, one of them is that society tolerates and even demands it, because there is a genral sense of injustice, because penalties for horrible crimes are felt to be too light.
There is no death penalty here, there is often no punishment for minors (so you do have your 17-year old serial rapist/murderer who can’t be punished), no one can do more than 30 years in jail in Brazil, and bureaucracy often makes it so people get parole after doing 1/6 of that time, no matter how badly they behaved.
Well-intentioned laws that aim to be humane and fair, but human nature being what it is, the end result is murderers and rapists getting off lightly, and most people not being “forgiving” of what happened to their loved ones, and society in general not approving. Then one of the results is brutal policemen acting unoficialy as executioners and being cheered on by society.
I am all for reduced penalties for victimless crimes like drug possession, and non-violent crimes should not result in prison time either. But violent crimes should be harshly punished, because the alternative is social unraveling.
Rene–what you say makes perfect sense but why hasn’t any politician tried to tap into this public anger by proposing stronger punishments for criminals?
likewise, support for the DP would probably wane here if people would be assured that murderers would not likely get the chance to kill again.
I want to believe in redemption, but…
Rehabilitating an offender is like teaching a wolf not to kill sheep. The only way you know if it worked is to put the wolf among sheep again. Which is potentially tough on the sheep.
Theory; there is a death sentence available for some crimes, but: the jury have to unanimously reccommend the death sentence, and the method of execution requires each member of that jury to press a button to make it happen.
That should at least plug some of the larger holes in the current system.
Cheers.
Bill –
The reasons are complex, and I think they have something to do with the general lack of genuine ideological right-wing politicians in Brazil. We have two kinds of politicians here: the left-wingers that are in it for a cause, and all the rest that are in it for the money.
The second kind will sometimes make right-wing noises to get votes, but once they get into power, they’re not really interested in rocking the boat in any way, just in lining their pockets.
And if the supposed right-wingers won’t do a thing to fix the general blandness of Brazilian law, you can bet that the left-wingers will do even less, since they’re still very much trapped in the Marxist viewpoint that all violence is caused by economic or social reasons external to the individual, and so it’s unfair to punish a violent criminal too harshly.
As a result, police violence flourishes in the local level.
Sam: I’m genuinely curious. Did you have that mindset–that anyone who is in prison had it coming–before you started working in the penal system?
And have you considered the possibility of getting into another line of work?
PAD
Wow, didn’t think I’d get all the vitriol.
To answer your question, no, I didn’t believe it. I believed that, you know, the big bad po-lice would lock just about anybody up, that there are innocent men somewhere in the system, that racial biases were overwhelming, etc, etc. Not too alien to what some folks posted above, calling me a horrible human being. I would have called myself a piece of šhìŧ, as well. It’s a strange thing to be, a Chicago liberal in the Georgia prison system.
But don’t get it twisted. I’ve never beaten an inmate – ever. I don’t believe in it. I don’t believe in harrassing or degrading a man. I treat these guys like human beings. Prison isn’t like in the TV shows or the movies. Yes, there are sadists and people on power trips in uniform, I’ve seen them and worked with them. Hëll, they’re the ones who have to worry about getting a shank in the ribs.
I don’t know what to tell you guys, but most men in prison are there for a charge that doesn’t accurately reflect what they’ve truly done to thier victims, thier families, and our society. They’re only in thier for the charges that the police and the prosecutors can prove. And prison is a horrible place for a man to be, it can turn a man into a animal. But I sincerely believe that God puts people where they really need to be, for whatever reason. Is the justice system perfect? No, personally, in most cases, I think it’s erring on the side of caution. The system can only put you away for things they can prove, not what you’ve truly done.
I suppose to get this perspective, you have to actually talk to people that are in prison, understand where they come from, what they’ve done, and actually see these people for who they are. There’s a flipside to that, as well – just as I feel that people in prison deserve to be there, I feel that there are men who have genuinely changed, and arn’t just predators that need to be locked up and the key thrown away. There’s a man right now in the prison I’m working at who I want to see get parole. He’s doing life for infanticide. How would you feel about that, reading that in the papers? You don’t know the man, you don’t know his situation, all you know is that he killed a baby. People would be up in arms about such a ‘dangerous predator getting back out on the streets’. But here I am, horrible human being that I am, the duly authorized representative of the Man who’s keeping him down, and I want him to go home. Weird world, huh?
Rene,
Yikes. And it’s a shame because you have a beautiful country. So much potential.
It’s puzzling too, since after looking up the political system there it isn’t too different from our own. I can’t believe that compulsory voting is the main reason for the dysfunction. I know the people are as worthy as any you’ll find here. so why has so much potential been so unrealized for so long?
How free is the press there? I’ve always thought that one of the reasons corruption doesn’t have quite the hold here that it does in other places is that the politicians are afraid that they’ll be found out if they are too obvious about it–or at least, if they are total crooks like Rangel, they will attempt to mitigate it by trying to deliver a good amount of goods and services to their constituents.
If you could change one aspect of Brazil, what would it be? What would it take to make it the equal of the other world powers/ It seems like it has all the ingredients–is it just waiting for that one great politician that can lead it to its rightful place?
And MY point is that YOUR ATTITUDE IS WHY COTTON’S SITUATION OCCURRED.
Sloppy thinking, sloppy work habits, sloppy approach to your work. And all it did was cost a man’s freedom. Do your due diligence and Cotton would have been a free man and you STILL would have the bad guys in jail.
And I’m certain he was no angel prior to incarceration.
And I’m pretty certain, based on your post, that you’re a rather worthless human.
That was easy, wasn’t it?
Sam said, “Nobody is in prison who didn’t, in some way, shape, or form, deserve it.”
And, “My point is, situations like Cotton’s are VERY FEW and VERY FAR BETWEEN. And I’m certain he was no angel prior to incarceration.”
You’re certain? And you come by this certainty how, exactly? What makes you so certain? Did he say he was no angel in the book? If so, why not cite the book, instead of stating your “certainty.”
I can’t help but think of a Bloom County cartoon where Senator Bedfellow has been caught up in a scandal. We see Milo in the jury box declare that the jury finds Bedfellow guilty, that he looks, smells and is guilty. He says the jury recommends Bedfellow be “fed to giant Iranian goat-eating cockroaches.”
“Thank you, Mr. Bloom,” the judge says.
“No sweat,” Milo replies.
“Would you mind if we started the trial?”
“No sweat.”
At one time or other we’re all “certain” about this, that or the other thing; doesn’t mean we’re right. I’m “certain” that a pair of my headphones that “walked away” from my desk at work last year were “helped” by a certain co-worker, who has a history of using other people’s property without asking. I asked if he took them and he denied it. At other times when he took private property (such as a tape recorder), he admitted to it, saying he needed to use it. He seemed to think such items were community property, and that taking them without asking was no big deal.
So, if he said he didn’t take the headphones (which eventually turned up, months later, in an unused desk in another part of the building), maybe he didn’t. Why would he deny it when he’s admitted to “borrowing” other items?
Seems logical, but I’m still “certain” he did take them. But am I right?
You’re “certain” about Cotton? Why? Because he ended up in prison?
Oh, right. If convicted, you must be guilty.
Tell that to Dr. Sam Sheppard.
Rick
Sam, ever meet Jim Unger of ‘HERMAN’ fame? Just wondering because it sounds as though you might have inspired one of his gags where a judge is telling the defendant “The jury has found you ‘not guilty’, but I’m going to give you two years just to be on the safe side.”
The way it stands – especially divided by State – the Death Penalty in this country is a failure. Does it deter crime? No. The dweeb holding up the Kwiki-mart is not thinking about that at all when he pulls the trigger. Then why do we have it? While CT may not put down more than one criminal every 40 years, Texas fries anything that moves, including its retarded citizens who can’t even understand the crime. This is not justice.
In a town with two state prisons in it that pay well and employ many, with local outreach programs that go into the prisons to work with the youth, we are used to prisoners. We are also a town still reeling from a very brutal child/family rape-murder by two men not three months released from prison on early parole, caught at the scene by the police trying to leave in the family’s car with their wallets, ID’s, and valuables on their persons. This is a town that wants blood, and the crimes certainly fit the criteria for the death penalty.
I am not opposed, but I remain divided on the death penalty; the rules for its use are sheer whimsy – shoot the Kwiki-Mart owner by accident during a robbery and you get the death penalty for deadly force during a crime, but willfully plot and scheme and stalk your girlfriend and kill her, and you get 40 years, and with good behavior you’re out in 7. The system doesn’t just have loopholes, it has railroads to freedom. Case in the news (CNN)today: a homeless man twice arrested for rape and soliciting children was arrested for raping and murdering a 13 year old girl *while wearing his GPS tracking device*. Where is the justice? How can you release a criminal you mean to keep tabs on when his address is an abandoned building near a field?
While I feel the death penalty is far over used, needs to have universal, stricter qualifications and incorruptable evidence (such as DNA testing, videos of the crime, etc), I do think it has its place for true depravity (torture/murder, etc). When the question of putting someone else to death becomes easy, the time has come to question our own humanity.
Being in the same spot as a crime does not necessarily make you guilty. If you drove a school shooter to school that morning, never knowing what he planned, are you really an accomplice, or just another sucker he conned? If you’re a crack addict sitting on your front step and a deal goes bad in the hall behind you, are you guilty of aiding and abetting? Not necessarily. But yes, especially when crimes are committed by peer groups, many will go along with the crime (“I only held her, I didn’t kill her” “I didn’t see it, I was waiting in the car…”) because they don’t have the individual strength to say no in the face of their peers – starting with teasing in school on up. But aiding and abetting should not be death penalty charges.
I urge people to read “Dead Man Walking”, which didn’t change my mind but underscores the issues – a far more balanced view than I expected, and to dig up an old Alan Alda movie, “The Glass House,” I think it was called. Nag your lawmakers to close up the dámņëd loopholes that allow people back on the streets two, three, four times to keep committing the crimes. Prevention is the key to fighting the death penalty.
As it stands now, it is cheaper to keep a prisoner in custody forever than it is to execute them.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Any way you want to look at it, the death penalty is murder.
No it isn’t. The legal term “murder” implies a criminal act. Death Penalty executions are state-sanctioned and within the letter of the law, therefore not criminal and not ‘murder’. However much people opposed to it may see it that way.