Post by CCADP on Aug 23, 2005 5:59:47 GMT -5
Making the punishment fit the crime
By JOHN MacDONALD
SPECIAL FOR THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC
Dennis Rader should be put down like an animal. If you don't agree, convince me otherwise.
The "BTK Killer" will not be executed, of course, but only because Kansas did not have the death penalty at the time he committed the infamous "Bind, Torture, Kill" slayings that terrorized Wichita over nearly three decades. Obviously, that's a matter of technical law.
But since this isn't a courtroom, we can focus on the philosophical question: If Rader doesn't deserve a swift, emphatic execution, does anyone?
At his sentencing hearing last week, we heard nauseating details about his awful crimes, so beyond comprehension they sounded like a B-grade horror film, except that even the most heartless director would never make a movie so cruel. His random, innocent victims suffered immense pain, and mercy was given to none.
For example, a Kansas law enforcement investigator testifying Wednesday recalled that after Rader strangled 11-year-old Josephine Otero's parents and younger brother in 1974 at their home, he took the young girl to the basement. There, lion and lamb spoke.
"What's going to happen to me?" Josephine asked.
"Well, honey, you're going to be in heaven with the rest of your family," Rader replied. Then he hanged her and masturbated over her body. Writing that sentence makes me sick.
Several important things must be considered. First, Rader is absolutely guilty. Not only is the physical and circumstantial evidence beyond any doubt, Rader confessed completely, and not as the result of coercion. On the contrary, when calmly discussing his crimes Rader almost seems to be reading from a book in which he's the villain.
While self-describing the stabbing and strangling of another Wichita woman, Rader told a police detective, "I'm sorry. I know this is a human being, but I'm a monster."
Since he confessed, there was no trial. No evidence was mishandled, no underpaid public defender fell asleep in the courtroom, no judge made an incorrect ruling. There's nothing to appeal. The glove fit, and no DNA evidence will come along in 10 years to exonerate him.
Economics and race were not factors. Rader is White, and lived an upper middle-class life in suburban Wichita. He was a church congregation president and Boy Scout leader. The Otero victims were Hispanic.
Rader was not a juvenile, but a full-grown man when his crimes were committed. Nor was he mentally retarded. By all accounts, he lived a quiet, professional, family life.
With all that in mind, I'm trying to find a reason why, if not for a legal technicality, we should not quickly and dispassionately put a bullet through Mr. Rader's skull and rid the world of an evil menace.
The normal arguments bore me. As one who has constantly struggled with the death penalty, I find most back-and-forth debates on the issue ultimately irrelevant.
There really is only one position in favor of capital punishment that is virtually beyond dispute: The punishment fits the crime. Arizona's death row inmates, like Rader, have committed unspeakable atrocities, the worst of the worst. After learning what these killers have done to others, it's impossible to argue they haven't earned their fate.
Conversely, one opposing viewpoint can't be denied: Thou shalt not kill. Execution, regardless of motive, takes a life.
I've checked the Ten Commandments monument at Wesley Bolin Plaza, but found no footnotes. If a person or institution takes a position that any killing is morally wrong, countering that argument becomes a problem. WWJF? Who Would Jesus Fry?
The common denominator of these arguments is subjectivity. Since there are lies, damn lies and statistics, every objective, empirical point always produces a compelling counterpoint, which does nothing to enlighten a national debate.
But the two positions above are consistent and entirely defensible because they spring from the deepest reaches of the human condition. I can defend either all day long.
But I cannot defend Dennis Rader. Standing alone, free from polarizing dispatches about inequity or "societal closure," he is a stone-cold murderer who preyed on other humans in a way that, I think, justifies his life's forfeiture.
Rader is the perfect subject of a discussion about whether we want the death penalty. The debate would be academic, using a real world example but without real consequences, posturing from defense counsel or tough-talking prosecutors.
After all the talking is through, if death penalty opponents convince us that Rader shouldn't be exterminated, the debate about capital punishment will be over.
But I don't like their chances.
- The Sun Herald
By JOHN MacDONALD
SPECIAL FOR THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC
Dennis Rader should be put down like an animal. If you don't agree, convince me otherwise.
The "BTK Killer" will not be executed, of course, but only because Kansas did not have the death penalty at the time he committed the infamous "Bind, Torture, Kill" slayings that terrorized Wichita over nearly three decades. Obviously, that's a matter of technical law.
But since this isn't a courtroom, we can focus on the philosophical question: If Rader doesn't deserve a swift, emphatic execution, does anyone?
At his sentencing hearing last week, we heard nauseating details about his awful crimes, so beyond comprehension they sounded like a B-grade horror film, except that even the most heartless director would never make a movie so cruel. His random, innocent victims suffered immense pain, and mercy was given to none.
For example, a Kansas law enforcement investigator testifying Wednesday recalled that after Rader strangled 11-year-old Josephine Otero's parents and younger brother in 1974 at their home, he took the young girl to the basement. There, lion and lamb spoke.
"What's going to happen to me?" Josephine asked.
"Well, honey, you're going to be in heaven with the rest of your family," Rader replied. Then he hanged her and masturbated over her body. Writing that sentence makes me sick.
Several important things must be considered. First, Rader is absolutely guilty. Not only is the physical and circumstantial evidence beyond any doubt, Rader confessed completely, and not as the result of coercion. On the contrary, when calmly discussing his crimes Rader almost seems to be reading from a book in which he's the villain.
While self-describing the stabbing and strangling of another Wichita woman, Rader told a police detective, "I'm sorry. I know this is a human being, but I'm a monster."
Since he confessed, there was no trial. No evidence was mishandled, no underpaid public defender fell asleep in the courtroom, no judge made an incorrect ruling. There's nothing to appeal. The glove fit, and no DNA evidence will come along in 10 years to exonerate him.
Economics and race were not factors. Rader is White, and lived an upper middle-class life in suburban Wichita. He was a church congregation president and Boy Scout leader. The Otero victims were Hispanic.
Rader was not a juvenile, but a full-grown man when his crimes were committed. Nor was he mentally retarded. By all accounts, he lived a quiet, professional, family life.
With all that in mind, I'm trying to find a reason why, if not for a legal technicality, we should not quickly and dispassionately put a bullet through Mr. Rader's skull and rid the world of an evil menace.
The normal arguments bore me. As one who has constantly struggled with the death penalty, I find most back-and-forth debates on the issue ultimately irrelevant.
There really is only one position in favor of capital punishment that is virtually beyond dispute: The punishment fits the crime. Arizona's death row inmates, like Rader, have committed unspeakable atrocities, the worst of the worst. After learning what these killers have done to others, it's impossible to argue they haven't earned their fate.
Conversely, one opposing viewpoint can't be denied: Thou shalt not kill. Execution, regardless of motive, takes a life.
I've checked the Ten Commandments monument at Wesley Bolin Plaza, but found no footnotes. If a person or institution takes a position that any killing is morally wrong, countering that argument becomes a problem. WWJF? Who Would Jesus Fry?
The common denominator of these arguments is subjectivity. Since there are lies, damn lies and statistics, every objective, empirical point always produces a compelling counterpoint, which does nothing to enlighten a national debate.
But the two positions above are consistent and entirely defensible because they spring from the deepest reaches of the human condition. I can defend either all day long.
But I cannot defend Dennis Rader. Standing alone, free from polarizing dispatches about inequity or "societal closure," he is a stone-cold murderer who preyed on other humans in a way that, I think, justifies his life's forfeiture.
Rader is the perfect subject of a discussion about whether we want the death penalty. The debate would be academic, using a real world example but without real consequences, posturing from defense counsel or tough-talking prosecutors.
After all the talking is through, if death penalty opponents convince us that Rader shouldn't be exterminated, the debate about capital punishment will be over.
But I don't like their chances.
- The Sun Herald