As a retired supreme court justice, I am acutely aware of everyone involved in the process of carrying out our state's ultimate criminal penalty: death by lethal injection.
Each person who participates in or is impacted by that process surely feels the great weight of his or her role: The governor, the attorneys representing the state of Arkansas, the attorneys representing the defendants, the trial judges and the appellate judges, the Department of Correction personnel, the defendants and their families, and last, but not least, the families of the victims.
Many people are frustrated with the lengthy appellate process in death cases, but "death is different," as Justice Antonin Scalia stated in Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991). An execution is final. There is no remedy if later scientific advances uncover evidence that would have exonerated the defendant.
Likewise, if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that a certain category of defendants may not be sentenced to death, such as recently happened regarding juvenile defendants, there would be no remedy for anyone in that category who had previously been executed.
The finality of the state's power to take a life is the reason why our system of criminal justice devotes so much time and energy to making sure that a defendant sentenced to death is afforded adequate legal representation and due process of law.
The taking of a life by the state is violent, whether by firing squad, electric chair, or lethal injection. Our criminal laws purport to promote nonviolence by criminalizing violent behavior, but we in fact promote violence by providing for the state to legally kill a human being.
Our government should not encourage violence as an appropriate response to violence. Unfortunately, revenge by violence only begets more violence. Every day we read or hear about someone being killed in our local community. Violence seems to have become an "acceptable" response to any dispute.
The well-known verse in the Book of Micah (chapter 6, verse 8) reminds us that justice should be delivered with mercy: "He has shown you, O man, what is good; And what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?"
We are cautioned to temper justice with mercy--it guards us from going too far.
One step toward breaking the cycle of violence would be for the state to stop sponsoring violence through the legal imposition of the death penalty.
There is no evidence that having the punishment option of a death sentence deters violent crime. In fact, it represents the state's seal of approval on death by violence.
Not only would a life sentence without the possibility of parole constitute justice tempered by mercy, it would also send a clear message to our children and our children's children: Our state's system of justice does not condone violence by any person or institution. And, to the extent that there can ever be closure after the violent death of a loved one, the victim's family could experience closure without delay, as the imposition of a life sentence without the possibility of parole begins immediately.
I pray that the state of Arkansas will temper justice with mercy and end the use of violence in our criminal justice system.
------------v------------
Annabelle Imber Tuck is a retired Arkansas Supreme Court justice. She was the first woman elected to that court, and served from 1997 to 2010.
Editorial on 06/12/2017