From the Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights press conference yesterday in Tokyo, the introductory remarks by Mr. Stefan Huber, Chargé d’Affaires a.i., Delegation of the EU to Japan:
Ladies and gentlemen,
It gives me great pleasure to be invited to speak at this press conference, and I am glad to have this opportunity to talk about human rights in general and the issue of the death penalty in particular.
For the EU, human rights matter. They are at the core of our identity and they are at the heart of what we do around the world. Our own history is about entrenching human rights, democracy and the rule of law across 27 Member States. This is a success story and one on which we base ourselves to promote human rights worldwide. So it is logical that we have developed a strong set of mechanisms to promote these values. To give just one example, over the last 18 months we have provided €235 million in funding for 900 NGO projects in 100 countries.
And I would like to add that in the wide realms of human rights the EU and Japan share many of the same values. Indeed, on many human rights topic, the EU and Japan stand side-by-side, like-minded partners.
But there is one noticeable exception, where the EU and Japan's position diverges and that is the reason why we are all here today. At the heart of the EU's human rights policy there is a strong belief that that abolition of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement of human dignity and the progressive development of human rights.
This is why not only have we abolished the death penalty in the European Union, but also why we espouse its abolition for others too. The EU therefore has a strongly held policy agreed by all Member States of working towards universal abolition of the death penalty and, where the death penalty still exists, to call for its use to be progressively restricted and to insist that it be carried out according to minimum standards.
Article 2 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights provides that no one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed. And following the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 the Fundamental Rights' Charter, which is referred to in the treaty, has the same legal value as the European Union Treaties. All EU member states are fully committed to these provisions and implement them in practice. All countries wishing to join the EU have to abolish the death penalty, too.
As you know Japan continues to apply the death penalty. The number of executions surged in the 2006-2008 period, prompting the EU to publish statements on the issue in 2008. The circumstances surrounding executions in Japan also worry us: secrecy, extended time in death row, and the quasi absence of pardon of sentence commutation.
But what frustrates us most in Japan is the absence of widespread, sincere debate on the issue. With the introduction of the lay judge system, capital punishment has been – for a short while – a bit more intensely discussed in the media, but other than that, there has been little effort to trigger a real reflection on the continued use of the death penalty in a democracy as mature and a society as safe as Japan.
I believe that Japan does not yet have a mature, responsible, open debate about the death penalty. Politicians all too rarely dare to lead the way on this subject. Thus, many members of the public do not have access to a fully informed understanding of the complicated issues involved. This is probably one of the reasons why Japanese public opinion is still in favour of the death penalty and why studies show a high public support rate.
In this context, further to our dialogue and confidential diplomacy towards the Japanese authorities, one of the things the EU is trying to contribute to in Japan, is to encourage more debate, to divulge more information, and encourage more reflection on the implications of the death penalty. This includes working more closely with NGOs and human rights defenders and helping them in their outreach efforts and advocacy work. For that purpose we provide financial support to a large number of projects for the promotion of democracy and human rights in non-EU countries through a dedicated programme, the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.
This year, one of the organisations to receive funding from the EU is the U.S.-based NGO, Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights. In Japan, aside from the high levels of public support, another reason often cited by retentionists for their support of the death penalty is the “need to think of the victims’ families”.
There is a widespread assumption, and not just in Japan, that victims’ families favour the death penalty. As today’s main speakers have previously stated, executions are presumed to meet survivors’ need for justice and closure and to oppose the death penalty is often seen as somehow being ‘anti-victim’. But this is not necessarily the case.
This visit will allow many Japanese to hear the voices of victims’ families in a context that is rarely heard in the public sphere in Japan, and I sincerely hope that it helps bolster the movement towards a mature, responsible debate in this country.
Thank you for your attention.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
MVFHR in South Korea
Here is a photo of Bud Welch speaking at MVFHR's press conference at the Catholic Pastoral Center for Social Correction, in South Korea
and here are Bud, Bob Curley, and Toshi Kazama meeting with Korean victims' family members
Toshi writes that there were 8 Korean victims' family members joining the U.S. visitors at this meeting. Over the course of two days in South Korea, the MVFHR group also met with the head of the Human Rights Aid division of the Ministry of Justice, the Chairperson of the Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly, and a member of the National Assembly who had introduced a death penalty abolition bill. The visit then culminated with a large public speaking event, "Don't kill in our name."
Many groups helped to make all of this happen: Catholic Bishops' Conference of Korea Justice and Peace Subcommittee for Abolition of Death Penalty. Pan-Religious Coalition for the Abolition of Death Penalty, Won Buddhist Human Rights Committee, Catholic Pastoral Committee for Social Correction of Korea, Catholic Human Rights Committee, National Council of Churches in Korea Justice and Peace Committee, and Coalition of Abolition of Death Penalty in Korea.
Bud, Bob, and Toshi have now met up with Renny Cushing, Jeanne Bishop, and Robert Meeropol in Japan, where there are engaged in a similarly full schedule of press conferences, meetings, and public speaking events. I'll post photos and quick reports as I get them.
and here are Bud, Bob Curley, and Toshi Kazama meeting with Korean victims' family members
Toshi writes that there were 8 Korean victims' family members joining the U.S. visitors at this meeting. Over the course of two days in South Korea, the MVFHR group also met with the head of the Human Rights Aid division of the Ministry of Justice, the Chairperson of the Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly, and a member of the National Assembly who had introduced a death penalty abolition bill. The visit then culminated with a large public speaking event, "Don't kill in our name."
Many groups helped to make all of this happen: Catholic Bishops' Conference of Korea Justice and Peace Subcommittee for Abolition of Death Penalty. Pan-Religious Coalition for the Abolition of Death Penalty, Won Buddhist Human Rights Committee, Catholic Pastoral Committee for Social Correction of Korea, Catholic Human Rights Committee, National Council of Churches in Korea Justice and Peace Committee, and Coalition of Abolition of Death Penalty in Korea.
Bud, Bob, and Toshi have now met up with Renny Cushing, Jeanne Bishop, and Robert Meeropol in Japan, where there are engaged in a similarly full schedule of press conferences, meetings, and public speaking events. I'll post photos and quick reports as I get them.
Monday, June 21, 2010
News coverage from South Korea
From today's edition of The Hankyoreh, a Korean news publication, "U.S. murder victims' families remain opposed to the death penalty":
U.S. civic organization MVFHR visited S. Korea to continue their call to end the death penalty
Representatives of U.S. civic organization Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), sit down to speak with relatives of murder victims in South Korea at the Catholic Adjustment Center, June 20.
As soon as Bud Welch, the 71-year-old President of the Board of Directors for the U.S. group Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), sat down for an interview on Saturday, he took out a photograph of his daughter Julie Marie. Some 167 people lost their lives in the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, and Julie was among the victims. As recently as when the U.S. president and attorney general declared in the wake of the incident that they would examine plans for executing those responsible, Welch believed that the death penalty was an appropriate punishment given his own pain and suffering.
Even amid that suffering, however, he controlled his rage. He collected his emotions by telling himself that executing those responsible would not bring his daughter back. And he openly objected to the decision at the time to execute the terrorist responsible.
“The death penalty is about vengeance and hatred, and that vengeance and hatred is what causes other bombings,” Welch explained.
After his ten-year-old son Jeffrey was slain in 1997, Robert Curley, 55, was enraged enough to lead a campaign to revive the death penalty in the U.S. state of Massachusetts. When he woke up every morning, he vowed that he would beat the killer to death if he ever found him. It was some time afterward that his ideas began to change and things began to appear different. Today, he believes the death penalty is not perfect.
“In the U.S., whether people are executed or not depends on money and race,” said Curley. “What changed me was the fact that the death penalty is a flawed system, neither perfect nor equal.”
MVFHR, established in 2004 by people like Welch and Curley who have lived with the pain of losing their loved ones to murder, has the overarching goal of the abolition of the death penalty. The name of its newsletter is “Article 3,” referring to the article in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights that includes the words “Everyone has the right to life.” The date of MVFHR’s establishment was Dec. 10, World Human Rights Day. Its members believe that the response to a violation of human rights, murder, must not be another violation of human rights, execution.
The members of the organization include not only those who lost their loved ones to murder but also family members of death row prisoners. Welch said that the father of Timothy McVeigh, the culprit in the Oklahoma City bombing, was also a victim like himself. “On Jun. 11, 2001, the day the death sentence was carried out, his father and I developed something in common,” Welch said. “The ways were different, but we both lost our sons.”
MVFHR’s members travel the country and relate their experiences under the conviction that they must end the death penalty everywhere in the world in the name of the victims.
On Saturday, they made their first visit to South Korea, at the invitation of the South Korean chapter of Amnesty International and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea’s Committee for Justice and Peace. On Sunday, they met with “Haemil,” an association of family members of murder victims in South Korea, and on Monday they are scheduled to visit the National Human Rights Commission of Korea and deliver a talk to the public entitled “Do Not Kill in Our Name.” Welch said it was encouraging that the death penalty has not been enforced in South Korea for the past thirteen years, and disappointing that there have been recent calls to carry out death sentences once again.
U.S. civic organization MVFHR visited S. Korea to continue their call to end the death penalty
Representatives of U.S. civic organization Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), sit down to speak with relatives of murder victims in South Korea at the Catholic Adjustment Center, June 20.
As soon as Bud Welch, the 71-year-old President of the Board of Directors for the U.S. group Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), sat down for an interview on Saturday, he took out a photograph of his daughter Julie Marie. Some 167 people lost their lives in the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, and Julie was among the victims. As recently as when the U.S. president and attorney general declared in the wake of the incident that they would examine plans for executing those responsible, Welch believed that the death penalty was an appropriate punishment given his own pain and suffering.
Even amid that suffering, however, he controlled his rage. He collected his emotions by telling himself that executing those responsible would not bring his daughter back. And he openly objected to the decision at the time to execute the terrorist responsible.
“The death penalty is about vengeance and hatred, and that vengeance and hatred is what causes other bombings,” Welch explained.
After his ten-year-old son Jeffrey was slain in 1997, Robert Curley, 55, was enraged enough to lead a campaign to revive the death penalty in the U.S. state of Massachusetts. When he woke up every morning, he vowed that he would beat the killer to death if he ever found him. It was some time afterward that his ideas began to change and things began to appear different. Today, he believes the death penalty is not perfect.
“In the U.S., whether people are executed or not depends on money and race,” said Curley. “What changed me was the fact that the death penalty is a flawed system, neither perfect nor equal.”
MVFHR, established in 2004 by people like Welch and Curley who have lived with the pain of losing their loved ones to murder, has the overarching goal of the abolition of the death penalty. The name of its newsletter is “Article 3,” referring to the article in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights that includes the words “Everyone has the right to life.” The date of MVFHR’s establishment was Dec. 10, World Human Rights Day. Its members believe that the response to a violation of human rights, murder, must not be another violation of human rights, execution.
The members of the organization include not only those who lost their loved ones to murder but also family members of death row prisoners. Welch said that the father of Timothy McVeigh, the culprit in the Oklahoma City bombing, was also a victim like himself. “On Jun. 11, 2001, the day the death sentence was carried out, his father and I developed something in common,” Welch said. “The ways were different, but we both lost our sons.”
MVFHR’s members travel the country and relate their experiences under the conviction that they must end the death penalty everywhere in the world in the name of the victims.
On Saturday, they made their first visit to South Korea, at the invitation of the South Korean chapter of Amnesty International and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Korea’s Committee for Justice and Peace. On Sunday, they met with “Haemil,” an association of family members of murder victims in South Korea, and on Monday they are scheduled to visit the National Human Rights Commission of Korea and deliver a talk to the public entitled “Do Not Kill in Our Name.” Welch said it was encouraging that the death penalty has not been enforced in South Korea for the past thirteen years, and disappointing that there have been recent calls to carry out death sentences once again.
Friday, June 18, 2010
It only hurts victims' families
Yesterday's AOL news page posted this piece by Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation director Beth Wood, "Death Penalty Only Hurts Victims' Families":
This week we are, yet again, focused on one celebrity offender.
We know his name -- Ronnie Lee Gardner -- and how he wants to die -- by firing squad -- and where he will meet his end -- in Salt Lake City.
We also know that the victim's family does not want him executed for the 1985 murder of Michael Burdell, a view shared by an increasing number of murder victims' families.
Most important, though, we know that the money devoted to executing Gardner could have been far better spent.
Fewer than 1 percent of convicted, death penalty eligible murderers are actually sentenced to death and actually executed. This means that more than 99 percent of murder victims' family members aren't getting the so-called "justice" of an execution. And it means that 100 percent of these families would benefit if all the money wasted on capital punishment was instead reallocated to meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Post-tragedy, family members of homicide victims face a myriad of needs. They face the very immediate needs of dealing with the media and burying their loved ones. They face longer-term needs, such as replacing lost wages, counseling expenses and caring for orphaned children.
Some needs are universal to all family members, such as a need to know what happened and why, the desire for the right offender to be apprehended and held accountable for his actions. And the need to be made whole again after such a cataclysmic rending of their world. These are common needs, familiar to family members whether they believe that the death penalty is appropriate or not.
Too often, these needs go unmet because so many resources are directed at so few criminals. Consider what could be accomplished:
Catching more killers
Chris Castillo, whose mother, Pilar, was murdered in 1991 in Houston, believes the money wasted on the death penalty could be better spent enhancing cold-case investigations. His mother's murderer was never caught, and he believes that solving this case and similar ones would protect society by getting more murderers off the streets.
Chris and his family are joined by others. The California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty just released "The Silent Crisis in California," a report about the crisis in unsolved cases in California.
Giving law enforcement the resources it needs to solve cold cases would meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Helping victims' families
Pat Songer started out thinking the death penalty was the right punishment for her son Jeffrey's killer. Twenty-seven years later, she is still waiting and is sure it was not right. She has not received closure or healing from the death sentence.
Her years of waiting have been punctuated by painful trips to hearings where her wounds were again ripped open and laid bare. If Jeffrey's killer is executed, Pat says, she "cannot believe it would make our world a better place." Not only does she feel that the death penalty doesn't meet any of her needs; she also feels the long and painful process further traumatizes her.
Putting murderers in prison and refocusing our resources and attention on family members of homicide victims would meet their real needs.
More mental health services
Nick and Amanda Wilcox's daughter Laura was murdered by a man who was mentally ill. Amanda notes that the more they learned about the tragedy, the more they realized that had the killer received proper mental health care early on, their daughter would still be alive.
Read about the Wilcoxes and 20 other families like them in "Double Tragedies: Victims Speak Out Against the Death Penalty for People With Severe Mental Illness."
Reallocating wasted dollars and attention from the death penalty to mental health resources would meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Gardner's high-profile execution is an opportunity for the country to rethink the death penalty. Let's put murderers in prison and turn our attention and resources to the real needs of murder victims' family members.
This week we are, yet again, focused on one celebrity offender.
We know his name -- Ronnie Lee Gardner -- and how he wants to die -- by firing squad -- and where he will meet his end -- in Salt Lake City.
We also know that the victim's family does not want him executed for the 1985 murder of Michael Burdell, a view shared by an increasing number of murder victims' families.
Most important, though, we know that the money devoted to executing Gardner could have been far better spent.
Fewer than 1 percent of convicted, death penalty eligible murderers are actually sentenced to death and actually executed. This means that more than 99 percent of murder victims' family members aren't getting the so-called "justice" of an execution. And it means that 100 percent of these families would benefit if all the money wasted on capital punishment was instead reallocated to meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Post-tragedy, family members of homicide victims face a myriad of needs. They face the very immediate needs of dealing with the media and burying their loved ones. They face longer-term needs, such as replacing lost wages, counseling expenses and caring for orphaned children.
Some needs are universal to all family members, such as a need to know what happened and why, the desire for the right offender to be apprehended and held accountable for his actions. And the need to be made whole again after such a cataclysmic rending of their world. These are common needs, familiar to family members whether they believe that the death penalty is appropriate or not.
Too often, these needs go unmet because so many resources are directed at so few criminals. Consider what could be accomplished:
Catching more killers
Chris Castillo, whose mother, Pilar, was murdered in 1991 in Houston, believes the money wasted on the death penalty could be better spent enhancing cold-case investigations. His mother's murderer was never caught, and he believes that solving this case and similar ones would protect society by getting more murderers off the streets.
Chris and his family are joined by others. The California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty just released "The Silent Crisis in California," a report about the crisis in unsolved cases in California.
Giving law enforcement the resources it needs to solve cold cases would meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Helping victims' families
Pat Songer started out thinking the death penalty was the right punishment for her son Jeffrey's killer. Twenty-seven years later, she is still waiting and is sure it was not right. She has not received closure or healing from the death sentence.
Her years of waiting have been punctuated by painful trips to hearings where her wounds were again ripped open and laid bare. If Jeffrey's killer is executed, Pat says, she "cannot believe it would make our world a better place." Not only does she feel that the death penalty doesn't meet any of her needs; she also feels the long and painful process further traumatizes her.
Putting murderers in prison and refocusing our resources and attention on family members of homicide victims would meet their real needs.
More mental health services
Nick and Amanda Wilcox's daughter Laura was murdered by a man who was mentally ill. Amanda notes that the more they learned about the tragedy, the more they realized that had the killer received proper mental health care early on, their daughter would still be alive.
Read about the Wilcoxes and 20 other families like them in "Double Tragedies: Victims Speak Out Against the Death Penalty for People With Severe Mental Illness."
Reallocating wasted dollars and attention from the death penalty to mental health resources would meet the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Gardner's high-profile execution is an opportunity for the country to rethink the death penalty. Let's put murderers in prison and turn our attention and resources to the real needs of murder victims' family members.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
I had to rethink the death penalty
We've added two more pages to our online Gallery of Victims' Stories: sisters Bess Klassen-Landisand Suzy Klassen, whose mother, Helen Bohn Klassen, was murdered in Indiana in 1969. Bess was 13 and Suzy was 11 at time of the murder, which to this day remains unsolved.
Last year, we posted excerpts from Bess's testimony before the New Hampshire Senate, and featured an essay by Suzy in an MVFHR newsletter that focused on how people are affected by murder and the death penalty.
In Suzy's Gallery page, she says, “I had only anger towards the man who murdered my mother, and thought about what his punishment should be if he were ever caught. It seemed to me that he should suffer and die in the same horrible way he forced my mother to. I had to rethink the death penalty when I became a mother myself. I realized that if I had a child who grew up to be a murderer, I would never stop loving him. The degree of love I felt would be the same as the first day I held him. With this realization I found complete forgiveness. I also knew my mother would never want someone killed in her name, as I don’t want anyone murdered in mine. The insanity of the death penalty has to end and I oppose it under any circumstance.”
Last year, we posted excerpts from Bess's testimony before the New Hampshire Senate, and featured an essay by Suzy in an MVFHR newsletter that focused on how people are affected by murder and the death penalty.
In Suzy's Gallery page, she says, “I had only anger towards the man who murdered my mother, and thought about what his punishment should be if he were ever caught. It seemed to me that he should suffer and die in the same horrible way he forced my mother to. I had to rethink the death penalty when I became a mother myself. I realized that if I had a child who grew up to be a murderer, I would never stop loving him. The degree of love I felt would be the same as the first day I held him. With this realization I found complete forgiveness. I also knew my mother would never want someone killed in her name, as I don’t want anyone murdered in mine. The insanity of the death penalty has to end and I oppose it under any circumstance.”
Monday, June 14, 2010
Report from the World Coalition meeting
I was able to get a quick report from Kate Lowenstein about the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty's General Assembly, held in San Francisco this past weekend. As a speaker on the Voices of Victims' Families panel, Kate talked about how important it is for abolition organizations around the world to begin right from the start to reach out to victims' families and think about how to incorporate victims' families into their work. Changing cultural assumptions about victims and the death penalty is challenging but so vitally important, Kate told the audience.
Also on the panel were Howard Morton of Families of Homicide Victims and Missing Persons and Judy Kerr of California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Both Howard and Judy have done a tremendous amount to raise public awareness about the needs of victims' families in general and of those with unsolved murders in particular.
The World Coalition gathering was a great opportunity to meet in person with colleagues from the U.S., Europe, and Asia, joined by MVFHR Board members Bill Pelke and Bill Babbitt. Bill Babbitt brought his grandson, Andrew Colvin, to volunteer at the event -- his first abolition conference -- and it was a treat to have another member of the Babbitt family join our collective effort to end the death penalty.
Also on the panel were Howard Morton of Families of Homicide Victims and Missing Persons and Judy Kerr of California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Both Howard and Judy have done a tremendous amount to raise public awareness about the needs of victims' families in general and of those with unsolved murders in particular.
The World Coalition gathering was a great opportunity to meet in person with colleagues from the U.S., Europe, and Asia, joined by MVFHR Board members Bill Pelke and Bill Babbitt. Bill Babbitt brought his grandson, Andrew Colvin, to volunteer at the event -- his first abolition conference -- and it was a treat to have another member of the Babbitt family join our collective effort to end the death penalty.
Friday, June 11, 2010
World Coalition gathering in San Francisco
Kate Lowenstein will be representing MVFHR at the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty's annual General Assembly, which will be held in San Francisco this weekend. This is the first time that the World Coalition has held a meeting in the U.S.
Kate will participate on a "Voices of Victims' Families Panel" along with Judy Kerr of California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty and Howard Morton of Families of Homicide Victims and Missing Persons, moderated by Natasha Minsker, the ACLU of Northern California's Death Penalty Policy Director.
Read more about the gathering here.
Kate will participate on a "Voices of Victims' Families Panel" along with Judy Kerr of California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty and Howard Morton of Families of Homicide Victims and Missing Persons, moderated by Natasha Minsker, the ACLU of Northern California's Death Penalty Policy Director.
Read more about the gathering here.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
In the name of their daughter
Thanks to the Death Penalty Information Center for posting this North Carolina newspaper editorial about the opposition to the death penalty from the family of Eve Marie Carson, who was murdered in 2008.
Eve Marie Carson received many honors in her brief lifetime. She was an outstanding undergraduate at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, popular among a virtual multitude of her fellow students who cherished her gentle ways and compassionate friendship.
She was respected by them so much that they elected her student body president. She was by all accounts a young woman who was on her way to making a difference in this world, thoughtful and committed to the people and causes about which she cared.
On Monday, in a Hillsborough courtroom, her family recognized her goodness again and reminded all who knew her, or just knew of her, just how much she will be missed. Thanks to them, to their daughter and to their shared opposition to the death penalty, Demario Atwater, charged in her brutal slaying that took place on March 5, 2008, will not go on trial for his life. The Carson family stoically sat in court as Raleigh attorney Wade Smith, who has been advising them, read their statement regarding the life-without-parole plea agreement.
The statement was powerful, saying that "today's outcome is neither adequate nor good," but that "it honors Eve's love of life and all people." Family members - Carson's father, Bob, her mother, Teresa Bethke, and her brother, Andrew Carson - did not speak. "We won't be talking to the court about how our lives are diminished without Eve," Smith read.
So with the court's acceptance of the plea deal, Atwater will not face a death penalty trial at which the full force of the state would have been brought against him, and instead will spend the rest of his own wasted life in prison.
His co-defendant, Laurence Alvin Lovette, now 19, is charged with murder, kidnapping and robbery in the case, which for him is pending. Because he was 17 at the time of the slaying, he will not face the death penalty. Both Atwater and Lovette were on probation, but their supervision was disgracefully lax, which was the case for too long in North Carolina.
The crime was especially brutal, with Carson taken from her home, driven around to withdraw cash from ATM machines and shot five times. The first four shots did not kill her. A final shotgun blast did.
It must have been unspeakably horrible for her family to know that, and to hear it in court. They were brave simply in their presence.
A desire for revenge, an eye for an eye, would have been entirely understandable. Somehow, the Carsons managed to resist it in the name of their daughter. For their courage in even facing this day, they deserve the admiration of all. Their daughter was a very special person. The same may be said of those who raised her.
Eve Marie Carson received many honors in her brief lifetime. She was an outstanding undergraduate at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, popular among a virtual multitude of her fellow students who cherished her gentle ways and compassionate friendship.
She was respected by them so much that they elected her student body president. She was by all accounts a young woman who was on her way to making a difference in this world, thoughtful and committed to the people and causes about which she cared.
On Monday, in a Hillsborough courtroom, her family recognized her goodness again and reminded all who knew her, or just knew of her, just how much she will be missed. Thanks to them, to their daughter and to their shared opposition to the death penalty, Demario Atwater, charged in her brutal slaying that took place on March 5, 2008, will not go on trial for his life. The Carson family stoically sat in court as Raleigh attorney Wade Smith, who has been advising them, read their statement regarding the life-without-parole plea agreement.
The statement was powerful, saying that "today's outcome is neither adequate nor good," but that "it honors Eve's love of life and all people." Family members - Carson's father, Bob, her mother, Teresa Bethke, and her brother, Andrew Carson - did not speak. "We won't be talking to the court about how our lives are diminished without Eve," Smith read.
So with the court's acceptance of the plea deal, Atwater will not face a death penalty trial at which the full force of the state would have been brought against him, and instead will spend the rest of his own wasted life in prison.
His co-defendant, Laurence Alvin Lovette, now 19, is charged with murder, kidnapping and robbery in the case, which for him is pending. Because he was 17 at the time of the slaying, he will not face the death penalty. Both Atwater and Lovette were on probation, but their supervision was disgracefully lax, which was the case for too long in North Carolina.
The crime was especially brutal, with Carson taken from her home, driven around to withdraw cash from ATM machines and shot five times. The first four shots did not kill her. A final shotgun blast did.
It must have been unspeakably horrible for her family to know that, and to hear it in court. They were brave simply in their presence.
A desire for revenge, an eye for an eye, would have been entirely understandable. Somehow, the Carsons managed to resist it in the name of their daughter. For their courage in even facing this day, they deserve the admiration of all. Their daughter was a very special person. The same may be said of those who raised her.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Children and Grief
A couple of weeks ago we posted about the Mother's Day Walk for Peace that MVFHR member Tina Chery has organized for the past several years. This week, a Psychology Today blog about children and grief quotes from a piece by Tina. Blogger Phyllis Silverman writes:
I found in my e-mail recently a piece written by Tina Chery, whose son had been murdered. She was writing it to explain why she walks on Mother’s Day with other parents whose children were murdered. This is the 16th Mother’s day since her son Louis Brown was killed when he inadvertently walked into the cross fire of rival gangs in his neighborhood. Hers is a different tragedy than what happened to survivors of the Holocaust, but nonetheless involving violence caused by human disrespect for others. As I read what she wrote I see that she is talking about a silence that she tried to maintain, as she fought facing her grief and the pain when she confronted what she had lost. She did not hide the fact of the death from her other children but she was trying to hide her grief, in some way, from herself as well as from them.
I quote what she wrote:
“Our children are grieving and we as adults are not equipped to know what to do and how to help; our children often feel the need to protect us and we as parents believe that we are protecting them by putting on a MASK of “I am FINE”
In the first few years after Louis was killed I remember not wanting to do anything or go anywhere with my family; we would make plans and when the time came I would cancel, feeling guilty for moving on and leaving Louis behind while at the same time not being there for my two babies. I remember my daughter at age 5 asking me if I still loved her and her brother. That day hearing her ask me that question and watching her sad face got me out of my trance.
How could I forget my children; they too needed to know me. I prayed to transform my pain and anger into power and action. The Mother’s Walk for Peace was born. I realized that if I was feeling this way how many mothers were in the same situation.
My children are my teachers not my friends. Louis in his young life, taught me to be a good mother. Alexandra and Allen today are teaching me to be a better mother, a mother who has had to learn to grieve the death of her oldest son while at the same time finding joy in celebrating the life of her two living children.”
I found in my e-mail recently a piece written by Tina Chery, whose son had been murdered. She was writing it to explain why she walks on Mother’s Day with other parents whose children were murdered. This is the 16th Mother’s day since her son Louis Brown was killed when he inadvertently walked into the cross fire of rival gangs in his neighborhood. Hers is a different tragedy than what happened to survivors of the Holocaust, but nonetheless involving violence caused by human disrespect for others. As I read what she wrote I see that she is talking about a silence that she tried to maintain, as she fought facing her grief and the pain when she confronted what she had lost. She did not hide the fact of the death from her other children but she was trying to hide her grief, in some way, from herself as well as from them.
I quote what she wrote:
“Our children are grieving and we as adults are not equipped to know what to do and how to help; our children often feel the need to protect us and we as parents believe that we are protecting them by putting on a MASK of “I am FINE”
In the first few years after Louis was killed I remember not wanting to do anything or go anywhere with my family; we would make plans and when the time came I would cancel, feeling guilty for moving on and leaving Louis behind while at the same time not being there for my two babies. I remember my daughter at age 5 asking me if I still loved her and her brother. That day hearing her ask me that question and watching her sad face got me out of my trance.
How could I forget my children; they too needed to know me. I prayed to transform my pain and anger into power and action. The Mother’s Walk for Peace was born. I realized that if I was feeling this way how many mothers were in the same situation.
My children are my teachers not my friends. Louis in his young life, taught me to be a good mother. Alexandra and Allen today are teaching me to be a better mother, a mother who has had to learn to grieve the death of her oldest son while at the same time finding joy in celebrating the life of her two living children.”
Monday, May 24, 2010
Speaking in Montana
MVFHR Board President Bud Welch is in Montana this week, speaking at a series of events around the state organized by the Montana Abolition Coalition. You can see the schedule here. We'll post coverage of these events as we get it.
Montana is one of many states that incorporates the voices of victims' family members into death penalty abolition efforts. Last year, 34 victims' family members signed a letter to the Montana House of Representatives in support of a repeal bill there. The letter included these lines: "It is vitally important that our state address the needs of surviving family and friends as we struggle to heal. We know that elected officials who promote the death penalty often do so with the best intentions of helping family members like us. We are writing to say that there are better ways to help us. The death penalty is a broken and costly system."
Montana is one of many states that incorporates the voices of victims' family members into death penalty abolition efforts. Last year, 34 victims' family members signed a letter to the Montana House of Representatives in support of a repeal bill there. The letter included these lines: "It is vitally important that our state address the needs of surviving family and friends as we struggle to heal. We know that elected officials who promote the death penalty often do so with the best intentions of helping family members like us. We are writing to say that there are better ways to help us. The death penalty is a broken and costly system."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)