Behind closed doors
The Daily Nebraskan February 19, 2001
--William Jennings Bryan (1915)
Last week, a controversy erupted over a suggestion Timothy McVeigh made in a letter published by the Sunday Oklahoman. McVeigh, observing the problems prison officials were having in finding room for relatives of his victims (more than 250) to view his execution, suggested that "a reasonable solution seems obvious: hold a true public execution." (OWH, 2/11/01)
Predictably, Bureau of Prisons spokesman Dan Dunne said: "It hasn't been considered. It won't happen." (OWH, 2/11/01) Instead, the prison system will set up a closed-circuit television system for the relatives to view McVeigh's execution.
Many newspaper commentators oppose showing McVeigh's execution publicly because they believe it is playing into his vision of himself as a martyr. Of course, it's bad policy to promote general rules based on exceptional instances. The "normal" convicted murderer is certainly not happy about being executed and would probably be adverse to having his death seen by all.
In fact, public executions have gained support from people on both sides of the political spectrum, including liberals such as Jesse Jackson and Nat Hentoff and conservatives such as George Will and James Philip (President of the Illinois Senate). By turning from an unusual instance (McVeigh) to a general policy applied to all convicted murderers, it seems clear that both supporters and opponents of capital punishment should favor public executions.
Supporters of capital punishment are motivated by a variety of factors, but at least publicly they espouse three reasons for their belief that the death penalty is justified: deterrence, "closure" for victims and retribution. The idea that the death penalty deters future murders has never been supported by a shred of evidence (in fact, recent studies show that 10 of the 12 states without it have homicide rates below the national average, even when one controls for demographic differences), but even if it somehow does prevent crime, presumably, deterrence could only take place if people know about it. Public executions would increase public awareness that evil people get what's coming to them and would thereby increase the deterrence effect of capital punishment generally.
A belief in "closure" also should entail a belief in capital punishment. The victims of a crime include far more than one's close relatives; they include friends, coworkers and the public in general (often we hear about how a murder was a crime against an entire community). By this logic, the more people able to view the murderer's execution, the more "closure" will be available.
And for those who believe in some cosmic notion of retribution or justice, public executions will have the exact same effect in ensuring that the offender gets what he or she deserves. For those who believe that capital punishment is unjust, the major objections (e.g., its disproportions, its violation of religious law or its racist and classist application) are not changed by having public executions.
Some concerned citizens, except those who support a deterrence rationale, may be afraid that it will make the public bloodthirsty or that it will harm children emotionally. But death by lethal injection, for example, is tame compared to the gruesome deaths we can all see on cable television or in comic books or, for that matter, on "Faces of Death," available in most rental outlets. Like the public's choice for all other forms of media, those who wouldn't want to watch it wouldn't be forced to.
There is, however, an important benefit to having public executions: increased awareness of exactly what the government is (or is not) doing. There is often much confusion over what happens during executions: Does the convict feel pain? What exactly were his last words? Was the execution team gentle or rough? According to some reports, inmates have burst into fire during electrocution or gone into convulsions after lethal injection; if denied by prison officials, how do we know who is telling the truth? Allowing the media access to executions would solve these problems.
According to Justice Brandeis, "Publicity is justly commanded as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman." Government action, especially action that is so potentially fraught with abuse such as capital punishment, needs to be in the public's view. Justice cannot exist in a world of lies or in a world of shadows. When prison officials refuse to even consider the idea of public executions, one wonders what exactly they are afraid of.
As Camus said, "One must kill publicly or confess that one does not feel authorized to kill."
(c) Jeremy Patrick, 2001