The last execution involved someone who murdered someone decades ago during a robbery where the jury seems tainted with anti-gay bias when choosing to make him one of a handful of people executed in South Dakota. Justen Hall is also a disreputable character:
Hall seems like one of many dangerous criminals who does not have the level of free will, so to speak, to warrant the ultimate punishment. Executing hm in some fashion might seem fair to people in his position. This doesn't excite me though. I understand that someone in his position might want to end things and pointing out how the system degraded him only takes one so far. Long term imprisonment is always going to be very hard and some rather die than deal with it. This was the subject of a well know short story from years back. But, those who scornfully call execution here a form of state assisted suicide are not really that wrong. And, this is not just misguided sympathy. The alternative is a long prison sentence.
The fact -- at least these days -- Hall welcomes death (as do others in prison, even those with less mental issues) does not to me provide the state a good reason to give it to him. On some level, that is a tad ironic, don't you think? At any rate, he was executed, refusing any additional appeals, thus no final Supreme Court orders. He apologized before dying and said he was ready. On that level, it was somewhat satisfactory.
===
I'm going to address something else that is something of an aside here, partially since learned part of the it after writing the above.
The victim was a victim of her involvement with the crowd in question, opening herself up to violence. This doesn't mean she "deserved" it or anything, but it does slightly mitigate the crime. She was not just some totally innocent person; it was somewhat akin to a gang member or hanger-on being killed for threatening to expose the gang's habits. This to me could have led one or more jurors to decide execution was not appropriate.
On the "worse of the worst" factor, a rough constitutional rule, there is the complicating factor he also admitted to another murder. However, he was not actually convicted for that one -- he was actually on bond (!) pending trial for it when he committed the one he was convicted of doing. If he was not convicted of this crime, it would be dubious to use it a reason to execute him. OTOH, why the hell was he on bail? Look what happened. Perhaps, the evidence was weak enough or the victim (saw a reference of the victim being transsexual) not honored enough for a higher bail to have been set. Or, maybe that was common practice.
(The bail was $75,000, but the general rule is you could get out by paying 10% and $7,500 is not that much in that respect even if he didn't have money from his illegal business or Aryan friends to help him out. Drug illegality also factors here. Violence is a consequence and often can be have avoided if drugs are legal. Meth isn't quite marijuana and he hung out with a group inclined to violence generally, but this too should be factored in.)
As district captain of the Aryan Circle gang, Hall ran a meth house in El Paso, a spot where gang members lived and partied. On the night of Oct. 28, 2002, prospective gang member Ted Murgatroyd and a friend, Melanie Billhartz, got into an argument. Billhartz threatened to call the cops on the gang's meth cooking operation. Hall overheard the threat and disappeared with Billhartz in her truck. Hours later, he returned with her dead body. Within days, Hall was arrested and confessed. He was sentenced to death in 2005.Hall has a waste of a life -- he is not even 40. Someone mixed in with the Aryan Circle gang, even indirectly, sounds a bit dubious if not as much as Hall. And, he didn't just murder her to deal with a threat but did so gratuitously:
According to documents, a medical examiner’s investigation revealed the power cord was wrapped tightly around Billhartz’s neck three times.The missing fingers appear to be a failed attempt to hide his guilt. The fact, quoting from one of these articles, this guy is mentally messed up is also not surprising:
The examiner’s report went on to say that the victim had fractured nasal bones, multiple fractures to her lower jaw bone, fractures in her right hand, a fractured rib, and fingers missing from her right hand.
The judges ruled that his attempt to end his life – and his hallucinations, paranoia, depression, and bipolar disorder – didn't make him incompetent to waive his appeals. In fact, they said, his depression and desire to die were understandable for one in his position.Among the litigation, the coverage noted a court determined that someone like him on death row trying to commit suicide was not proof of incompetency. Wanting to end it all given the state of life in that situation was rather rational. So, the court accepted his statement that any claim of innocence was a means to delay, not actual belief of innocence. Or, lessened guilt. OTOH, there still is evidence he has serious mental issues. This sort of thing might not be enough under current law to block an execution, but maybe it should. This came up already this year.
Hall seems like one of many dangerous criminals who does not have the level of free will, so to speak, to warrant the ultimate punishment. Executing hm in some fashion might seem fair to people in his position. This doesn't excite me though. I understand that someone in his position might want to end things and pointing out how the system degraded him only takes one so far. Long term imprisonment is always going to be very hard and some rather die than deal with it. This was the subject of a well know short story from years back. But, those who scornfully call execution here a form of state assisted suicide are not really that wrong. And, this is not just misguided sympathy. The alternative is a long prison sentence.
The fact -- at least these days -- Hall welcomes death (as do others in prison, even those with less mental issues) does not to me provide the state a good reason to give it to him. On some level, that is a tad ironic, don't you think? At any rate, he was executed, refusing any additional appeals, thus no final Supreme Court orders. He apologized before dying and said he was ready. On that level, it was somewhat satisfactory.
===
I'm going to address something else that is something of an aside here, partially since learned part of the it after writing the above.
The victim was a victim of her involvement with the crowd in question, opening herself up to violence. This doesn't mean she "deserved" it or anything, but it does slightly mitigate the crime. She was not just some totally innocent person; it was somewhat akin to a gang member or hanger-on being killed for threatening to expose the gang's habits. This to me could have led one or more jurors to decide execution was not appropriate.
On the "worse of the worst" factor, a rough constitutional rule, there is the complicating factor he also admitted to another murder. However, he was not actually convicted for that one -- he was actually on bond (!) pending trial for it when he committed the one he was convicted of doing. If he was not convicted of this crime, it would be dubious to use it a reason to execute him. OTOH, why the hell was he on bail? Look what happened. Perhaps, the evidence was weak enough or the victim (saw a reference of the victim being transsexual) not honored enough for a higher bail to have been set. Or, maybe that was common practice.
(The bail was $75,000, but the general rule is you could get out by paying 10% and $7,500 is not that much in that respect even if he didn't have money from his illegal business or Aryan friends to help him out. Drug illegality also factors here. Violence is a consequence and often can be have avoided if drugs are legal. Meth isn't quite marijuana and he hung out with a group inclined to violence generally, but this too should be factored in.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!