“It’s Just the Insanity of the Whole Event.”

The Death Penalty Legislative Study Committee has begun. I believe it will be an ongoing thing for months or even a year or so.

Last week, I attended the second day of the Committee. As somebody who had never sat in on a state government proceeding, I was expecting to be bored out of my mind. I’m a music and entertainment kind of girl, and do not usually do well sitting in one place for long periods of time.

I was very surprised to find myself riveted by the presentations and by observing how it all is done when a committee goes through the process of listening to presenters, asking questions, each member giving their opinions, etc.

There were a couple of highlights for me. When the Debbie Inglis, General Counsel for the Tennessee Department of Corrections, presented the current lethal injection protocol, Father Charles Strobel (who is a member of the committee) and she had this exchange:

Fr. Strobel: “I hope this question is not out of order, yet I’d like to just see it in the context of the entire execution: As the person to be executed is brought to the chamber, what if he or she were to have a massive heart attack? What would be done?”

Ms. Inglis: “Um, during the death watch period?”

Fr. Strobel: “Right before they are getting strapped in.”

Ms. Inglis: “Um, I think emergency treatment would be provided.”

Fr. Strobel: “So we would bring them back in order to kill them in a few minutes?”

Ms. Inglis: “I think we would, yes.”

Fr. Strobel: “Isn’t that a schizoid sort of way of thinking?”

Ms. Inglis: “I prefer not to comment.”

Fr. Strobel: “Yeah, I know, I just think…it’s sort of the insanity of the whole event.”

Bradley MacLean, of The Tennessee Justice Project (and who I assist), gave a status report of the death penalty in Tennessee. Before getting into the hard numbers and statistics, he gave some background as to why he is now doing the work that he is, and why there is a need to review the fairness of the system.

Some of the highlights of his excellent presentation that really stood out to me:

“I have lived in the world of civil litigation representing major corporate clients in civil matters involving money, and I have lived in the world of capital case litigation involving a person’s life. I can tell you based upon these past 15 years of personal experience that the quality of lawyering as a general proposition in a civil litigation matter is far more advanced and far more involved than the quality of lawyering that you see in a typical death penalty case.

Now when I say that I don’t mean to suggest that death penalty lawyers are not good lawyers. Some of the death penalty lawyers I know are among the best, the most committed, the most dedicated, the most skilled, and the most hard working lawyers I know. But in terms of the entire collection of lawyers who do death penalty work at the trial level particularly, the quality of lawyering in the civil arena is far superior than the quality of lawyering in the death penalty arena partly because of qualifications, partly because of the level of performance, and largely because of resources available.

I have been in jury trials in civil cases, and I can tell you that the costs, the legal fees, the expert fees that are involved in a typical civil litigation involving… 2.5 million dollars in dispute is quite different from what you see in many death penalty cases.

Let me just say that I understand what the qualification standards are, and I understand that a lawyer with 5 years’ experience could possibly qualify to handle a death penalty case, (but) the notion that you would put a lawyer with only 5 or 10 years of experience, or even 15 years of experience, against (a prosecutor like) Gen. Schmutzer… is something that no major law firm would ever consider.”

And yet it happens all the time. Most of the defendants are poor (indigent). This means they will be utilizing the services of a public defender. There is a major disparity between the money & resources available to public defenders and the state prosecutors. So with the problems with the way the system is currently being run, again I ask, how can defendants who are poor get the constitutionally guaranteed representation they are entitled to if their lawyers are inexperienced, overworked, and underpaid?

So to sum it up…

If we really believe that life is precious, why do money cases get better lawyers than ones where a person’s life is at stake?

If we really believe that life is precious, why would we save the life of the condemned as they are walking to the death chamber only to snatch it back from them once they’ve been revived? So the State can be sure to show who’s Boss?

Money and power, folks. That’s what it’s all about. Money and power.