Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. A generous donor is matching all donations of $100 or more! So please donate now to double your punch!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Tsarnaev and the Death Penalty

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has just been sentenced to death by a federal jury for his role in the Boston Marathon bombings. The sentence has been met with a lot of discomfort in Boston and the surrounding environs. Massachusetts is predisposed to rejecting capital punishment as a general rule. Even in this case, where the terror and horror hit so close to home, the people of Massachusetts are leery of the death penalty.

And for good reason.

The application of the death penalty in the United States is rife with racism, false guilt, and corruption. The nation is slowly but surely moving towards abolishing the practice. But there are still many men (and a few women) on death row, and it stands to statistical reasoning that at least some are innocent. With an average of 4 people exonerated annually from death row, it’s impossible to believe some have not fallen through the cracks.

In light of the at best questionable guilt of many of the people facing execution or already killed, trusting the United States to apply the death penalty fairly requires a suspension of disbelief. This suspension of disbelief is as follows: the United States has the right to put people to death and even though it may have erred in the past, this time will be different. This time, the United States is acting in accordance to its own rules and justice will be served.

Unfortunately for that point of view, the US has proven again and again that it has little to no understanding of or care for the rule of law when it comes to acts of oppression against its own citizens. From surveillance totorture to assassination, the US acts as it wishes in relation to its citizenry (to say nothing of the rest of the world). In this light, it’s not hard to see where the American love affair with the death penalty comes from at the administrative level.

What’s even more disturbing is the fetishization of revenge that the American people take part in by endorsing the government’s right to kill its citizens. Although support for the death penalty has fallen drastically in the last twenty years, a plurality of Americans still support it outright and many- paradoxically- support it with the caveat that it only be used on certain criminals for certain crimes. And this support comes from the public, those whose lives could be destroyed by false evidence or the whims of a prosecutor, the desire of the government to send a message or simply a misled jury. It boggles the mind.

Even in the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, there are inconsistencies. Tsarnaez’s guilt in the horrific attack on the Boston Marathon is not in question. He has admitted his role and culpability. In fact, if there were a case that the death penalty could be applied with little to no worry about innocence or questions of justice, this might be it. But of course this is hardly the whole story

There are questions about how the jury reached the death sentence. The Intercept’s Murtaza Hussain has already written a thorough article detailing the questionable practices of the judge in the case to force the jury to find for death. The federal government, prosecuting the case, acted to stymy any conceivable action by the defense to change the venue to one less emotionally resonant than Boston.

Even in a case as open and shut as this, where the accused has admitted his guilt, the government feels it is necessary to lie and prevaricate to garner the public’s support for killing. This should be a red flag for anyone still holding out hope that the death penalty is a legitimate punitive measure as applied by the government.

Support for the death penalty is support for the government having the power of life and death over its citizenry. It’s not a power the people should support, especially when the government in question has as troubled a record with legislative matters of life and death as the United States. Even when the accused is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

Eoin Higgins is a writer and historian from upstate New York. He is a recent graduate of the Masters in History program at Fordham University’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. You can find his work at eoinhiggins.blogspot.com and follow him on twitter @CatharticMe

 

 

More articles by:

Eoin Higgins has a master’s degree in history from Fordham University. He lives in New York.

Weekend Edition
October 19, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jason Hirthler
The Pieties of the Liberal Class
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Day in My Life at CounterPunch
Paul Street
“Male Energy,” Authoritarian Whiteness and Creeping Fascism in the Age of Trump
Nick Pemberton
Reflections on Chomsky’s Voting Strategy: Why The Democratic Party Can’t Be Saved
John Davis
The Last History of the United States
Yigal Bronner
The Road to Khan al-Akhmar
Robert Hunziker
The Negan Syndrome
Andrew Levine
Democrats Ahead: Progressives Beware
Rannie Amiri
There is No “Proxy War” in Yemen
David Rosen
America’s Lost Souls: the 21st Century Lumpen-Proletariat?
Joseph Natoli
The Age of Misrepresentations
Ron Jacobs
History Is Not Kind
John Laforge
White House Radiation: Weakened Regulations Would Save Industry Billions
Ramzy Baroud
The UN ‘Sheriff’: Nikki Haley Elevated Israel, Damaged US Standing
Robert Fantina
Trump, Human Rights and the Middle East
Anthony Pahnke – Jim Goodman
NAFTA 2.0 Will Help Corporations More Than Farmers
Jill Richardson
Identity Crisis: Elizabeth Warren’s Claims Cherokee Heritage
Sam Husseini
The Most Strategic Midterm Race: Elder Challenges Hoyer
Maria Foscarinis – John Tharp
The Criminalization of Homelessness
Robert Fisk
The Story of the Armenian Legion: a Dark Tale of Anger and Revenge
Jacques R. Pauwels
Dinner With Marx in the House of the Swan
Dave Lindorff
US ‘Outrage’ over Slaying of US Residents Depends on the Nation Responsible
Ricardo Vaz
How Many Yemenis is a DC Pundit Worth?
Elliot Sperber
Build More Gardens, Phase out Cars
Chris Gilbert
In the Wake of Nepal’s Incomplete Revolution: Dispatch by a Far-Flung Bolivarian 
Muhammad Othman
Let Us Bray
Gerry Brown
Are Chinese Municipal $6 Trillion (40 Trillion Yuan) Hidden Debts Posing Titanic Risks?
Rev. William Alberts
Judge Kavanaugh’s Defenders Doth Protest Too Much
Ralph Nader
Unmasking Phony Values Campaigns by the Corporatists
Victor Grossman
A Big Rally and a Bavarian Vote
James Bovard
Groped at the Airport: Congress Must End TSA’s Sexual Assaults on Women
Jeff Roby
Florida After Hurricane Michael: the Sad State of the Unheeded Planner
Wim Laven
Intentional or Incompetence—Voter Suppression Where We Live
Bradley Kaye
The Policy of Policing
Wim Laven
The Catholic Church Fails Sexual Abuse Victims
Kevin Cashman
One Year After Hurricane Maria: Employment in Puerto Rico is Down by 26,000
Dr. Hakim Young
Nonviolent Afghans Bring a Breath of Fresh Air
Karl Grossman
Irving Like vs. Big Nuke
Dan Corjescu
The New Politics of Climate Change
John Carter
The Plight of the Pyrenees: the Abandoned Guard Dogs of the West
Ted Rall
Brett Kavanaugh and the Politics of Emotion-Shaming
Graham Peebles
Sharing is Key to a New Economic and Democratic Order
Ed Rampell
The Advocates
Louis Proyect
The Education Business
David Yearsley
Shock-and-Awe Inside Oracle Arena
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail