Good Night Grandpa

It must be hard to argue there's no media bias when one views the photo attached to this AP story about the execution of Clarence Ray Allen lastnight. If there was no caption or accompanying story, you may be forgiven for thinking it's simply a family portrait representing 3 harmonious generations. The background even suggests it could have been taken at a Japanese Ryokan while on vacation. Now let's have a look at the text of the article:

SAN QUENTIN, Calif. - California executed its oldest death row inmate early Tuesday, minutes after his 76th birthday, despite arguments that putting to death an elderly, blind and wheelchair-bound man was cruel and unusual punishment.
(What a cruel state! Executing a helpless old man--and minutes after he finished his birthday cake. He probably still had frosting on his lips.)

Allen, who was blind and mostly deaf, (In case you already forgot he was blind, and deaf to boot!) suffered from diabetes and had a nearly fatal heart attack in September only to be revived and returned to death row, (forget the irony for a moment and imagine the outcry if he were allowed to die of a heart attack while on Death Row) was assisted into the death chamber by four large correctional officers (very important to point out the correctional officers were large--suggesting the unnecessary use of force on such a feeble and helpless old man) and lifted out of his wheelchair.

His lawyers had raised two claims never before endorsed by the high court: that executing a frail old man would violate the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment, and that the 23 years he spent on death row were unconstitutionally cruel as well. (As taught in law school: If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If they're both against you, call the other side names. It seems as though both the law and the facts are against him, but instead of name calling his lawyers resorted to hyperbole.)

Here's the part about the media that I find so insidious. If you don't believe me, apply this template to the next NPR story you hear. The reporter has already set the tone of the article by painting the murderer on death row as just another victim of a police state. Now we get to hear from the other side for the sake of presenting a counterpoint. I'll call it the "HOWEVER" side. After we've tolerated what the opposition has to say, the reporter returns to the original tone of the article. The final impression reinforces the first which ensures it will be lasting.

HOWEVER...

The high court rejected his requests for a stay of execution about 10 hours before he was to be put to death. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger denied Allen clemency Friday.
Allen went to prison for having his teenage son's 17-year-old girlfriend murdered for fear she would tell police about a grocery-store burglary. While behind bars, he tried to have witnesses in the case wiped out, prosecutors said. He was sentenced to death in 1982 for hiring a hit man who killed a witness and two bystanders.
"Allen deserves capital punishment because he was already serving a life sentence for murder when he masterminded the murders of three innocent young people and conspired to attack the heart of our criminal justice system," state prosecutor Ward Campbell said.

Lest the "HOWEVER" part of the article make too great of an impression, we better hear from the victim, sorry, the murderer again:

Allen expressed his love for family, friends and the other death-row inmates in a final statement read by Warden Steve Ornoski. Allen ended his statement by saying, "It's a good day to die. Thank you very much. I love you all. Goodbye."

Now we finally get to hear from the family of one of his victims about three-quarters of the way into the article:

The family of one of Allen's victims, Josephine Rocha, issued a statement saying that "justice has prevailed today."
"Mr. Allen abused the justice system with endless appeals until he lived longer in prison than the short 17 years of Josephine's life," the statement said.

Now that we've heard from the "HOWEVER" side, we can return to the original--and correct--tone of the article:

Last month in Mississippi, John B. Nixon, 77, became the oldest person executed in the United States since capital punishment resumed. He did not pursue an appeal based on his age. (Mississippi murders old people, too.)

Allen's case generated less attention than last month's execution of Crips gang co-founder Stanley Tookie Williams, whose case set off a nationwide debate over the possibility of redemption on death row, with Hollywood stars and capital punishment foes arguing that Williams had made amends by writing children's books about the dangers of gangs.
(Despite the pleas of such model citizens as Hollywood stars and people with feelings nationwide, the State of California chose to murder another misunderstood citizen who only wanted to help the world by writing children's books.)

There were only about 200 people gathered outside the prison gates before Allen's execution, about one-tenth of the crowd that came out last month.
(Sadly for Mr. Allen, his name didn't have the same marquee value as Tookie's. Or maybe all that protesting is just too exhausting so soon after Tookie's execution?)

(end)

Commentary

It's hard to feel that any sort of justice is served when, once a death penalty verdict is handed down, it automatically gets bogged down in appeals for so long that the perpetrator is magically transformed into a victim over time. During the appeals process the crime is so thoroughly dissected that it gets reduced to the point that it has no meaning--where abstract notions supplant real human suffering and damage. The victim--whose right to life was violently taken by the person behind bars--has no advocate beyond family members who must surely become fatigued by the injustice and the continual reminder via appeals that the killer of their loved one is the "real" victim.
Opponents of the death penalty are right about one thing: it is not much of a deterrent in its present form. Who would be deterred from committing a pre-meditated murder when they know they can be kept alive for years through an endless process of appeals? With time and honest jail living they may even be able to convince lots of high profile people on the outside that they are the only victim in the whole sordid affair, as Tookie Williams did.
I believe the death penalty should be applied sparingly and then only in the most horrendous of crimes. But once a guilty verdict has been reached, the sentence should be carried out in the most expeditious manner possible. A guilty person should not be allowed the luxury of time to erode the seriousness of their crime. It may even act as a deterrent if it were carried out swiftly.