Now is the time to oppose the death penalty

Erika Kirk says she forgives Tyler Robinson for allegedly killing her husband. That means that if convicted, he should not be killed.

Electric Chair by Andy Warhol, 1963.

Prosecutors in Utah are seeking capital punishment for Tyler Robinson, age 22, the alleged assassin of Charlie Kirk.

Yet at the supersized memorial service on Sunday, Kirk’s widow Erika said from the podium that she forgives Robinson for doing what he is accused of. At minimum, this forgiveness should be reflected by prosecutors backing down in their call for the death penalty for Robinson. And it’s a good time for Americans to question whether the death penalty should exist at all.

Europe abandoned capital punishment after the Holocaust. China still has it, as does Singapore, and most Islamic States. Among Western nations, the United States is the exception to this brutal and archaic form of punishment.

There is no valid argument — legal, moral or economic — for the executing a convict. And there are many arguments against it, the most compelling one being, what if the prosecutors and the judge are wrong?

Thirteen Executed, Thirteen Others Exculpated

In 2003, then-Illionis Gov. George Ryan communed the sentences of 167 death row inmates to 40 years in prison. Why did he do this?

Well, up until that time, the state had executed 13 prisoners in the “post-Furman” era — the new, allegedly fairer generation of capital punishment after 1973. And at the same time, 13 Illinois prisoners had been exculpated: that is to say, after all the trials and appeals, they had been found to have committed no crime but were still sitting on death row, waiting to be killed.

How was that? In five cases, journalism students at Northwestern University did original work that determined that Anthony Porter, in one case, and the “Ford Heights Four,” in another — had committed no crime. After all the trials and appeals that upheld conviction, journalism students discovered they were innocent.

These and eight other Illinois cases raised awareness of the wrongful conviction problem, and the governor put a stop to executions.

The Death Penalty Information Center says that 200 Americans have been exonerated since 1973 after finding their way to death row. Amnesty International, in its now out-of-print book on the death penalty, wrote that at least 25 people were known to have been exonerated after they were executed. These are numbers that should chill the bones of anyone with a conscience — as should the notion that it could happen to even one person.

Nobody can say wrongful conviction is not an issue. Yet once a prisoner is executed, they cannot be released from prison if exonerated; they cannot be brought back from the dead. And the legal system has no concept where it is sending the prisoner — to eternal bliss, eternal damnation, or noplace special.

Due Process Was Not Afforded to the Wrongly Convicted

There are no moral arguments for using state homicide (the official cause of death in an execution) to punish some other form of homicide. We live under the Magna Carta, not the Code of Hammurabi. That means due process — which clearly was not afforded to the hundreds of people who were convicted and then later exonerated (or executed wrongfully).

There is no legal justification to kill a prisoner, as revenge is not part of the law. Keeping people in prison is just as safe to society as not having them exist at all. There is also a documented brutalizing effect as the state takes on the role of killer, celebrating the power to kill, spreading that example and terrorizing society a second time for the same crime.

There is no financial justification. Capital trials and punishment cost many times life in prison without possibility of parole — up to 10 times the cost, depending on how you add it up. The higher costs stem from lengthier trials, extensive mandatory appeals, the added costs of more lawyers and experts on both sides of the case, and more complex legal procedures required in capital cases. Death row itself is expensive to maintain.

Impact on the Executioners

Sister Helen Prejean (whom we know from being characterized in the film Dead Man Walking) has campaigned against the death penalty on the grounds that it destroys the lives of the people who must carry it out. Whomever they are killing, the act of doing so takes a toll on the executioners spiritually and emotionally, and they all know the man or woman being put to death may be innocent.

Many executions have failed at a “painless death” as advertised to the public. In some instances, it seems like more a form of torture. Medical personnel are made to violate their oath to do no harm.

Finally, the families of victims are not all in favor of killing the accused. Many say that the harm is only worsened by doing so. In the case of Erika Kirk, a Christian whose lord and God was put to death as an innocent man, she says she forgives the accused killer. That should mean something.

Given the documented problems with the crime scene and the handling of the case, we have many reasons for concern about whether justice will really be carried out.

Utah County and federal prosecutors should take the death penalty off the table for Tyler Robinson, honoring Mrs. Kirk’s call for forgiveness. And the United States as an allegedly Christian society needs to rethink the whole concept of the government having the power to commit ritual murder, which amounts to human sacrifice. The question deserves an answer: Who would Jesus kill?