Two high-profile death row cases in the United States hit the headlines recently: those of Christa Pike and Nidal Hasan. Both, for different reasons, sparked a debate over how justice is administered.
THE CHRISTA PIKE CASE
 |
| Colleen Slemmer |
The nature of the crime was horrendous, making it one of the most sensational teenage crimes anywhere in the world.
 |
| Christa Pike |
The third person involved, Shadolla Peterson, did not actively take part in the murder; she had kept watch on the perimeter. During the course of the investigation, she decided to cooperate with the police and disclosed exactly how the crime occurred. In return, she received a one-year jail term and six years of probation. Nothing is now known about her whereabouts.
WHY PIKE'S CASE IS UNIQUE
Christa Pike is the only woman on Tennessee’s death row. On September 30, she was set to be the first woman executed in the state in over 200 years.
On the day of the execution, she was administered two full doses of the sedative pentobarbital. But for reasons that are under investigation, she not only survived, but remained fully conscious and complained of uneasiness.
After it was established that the lethal injection had failed, she was rushed to a nearby hospital. In a strange twist of fate, the very same authorities who were trying to execute her were making every effort to keep her alive.
This is not the first time a planned execution has failed. There have been instances, especially in the US, when procedures involving electric chairs, gas chambers, and firing squads have failed due to equipment malfunction, improper drug mixtures, or missed target areas.
However, this is the first time — certainly in the US, and possibly in the world — that a death-row convict has survived after being administered a full dose of a lethal injection.
THE NIDAL HASAN CASE
 |
| Nidal Hasan |
He is scheduled to be executed on 3 December this year, marking the US military’s first execution by firing squad since World War II. But this case has hit the headlines for a totally different reason. On the 9th of this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the execution would be publicly broadcast and livestreamed.
This naturally set off a major public outcry from politicians of major parties and human rights organisations, who argued that it would fuel terrorism rather than curb it. An ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll showed that 80% of Americans opposed livestreaming the execution.
President Trump did not directly comment on it. However, during an event, he remarked that back in the 1900s "we had really strong laws", whereas now "you can do almost anything; nothing happens. But we're changing that." Following the massive backlash, Trump cancelled the broadcast plan.
A LIFE WORSE THAN DEATH?
I was thinking about the life Christa Pike has lived so far.
She had an extremely traumatic childhood involving physical and sexual violence. She was later diagnosed with bipolar disorder and PTSD. That is definitely no justification for the murder she committed at the age of 18.
About a year later, she became one of the youngest people in the US to be sentenced to death. In 2001, while in prison, she tried to kill a fellow inmate by strangling her with a shoestring.
She has spent the remaining 30 odd years of her life, much of it in solitary confinement, awaiting the day her life would be taken. Yet she seems destined to live. Seen from another angle, she has probably lived a life worse than death — and that life does not seem to end.
DEATH AS PUNISHMENT: OKAY OR NOT?
Capital punishment has always been a much-debated issue, with strong arguments on both sides.
Proponents argue that it acts as a powerful deterrent, provides proportional retribution, and offers a sense of justice and emotional comfort to the victims' families and friends.
Opponents contend that the state itself becomes a killer. Secondly, the punishment is irreversible — if a legal flaw in the conviction is discovered later and the convict is proved innocent, there is no way to reverse the punishment and exonerate them. Thirdly, they argue that the right way to deal with a criminal is reform, not retribution.
Be that as it may, globally, the number of executions has come down, and public opinion has been shifting against capital punishment.
MY VIEW
I don't agree with a total ban on capital punishment. But, it must be awarded only in the rarest of rare cases: where the crime is extremely gruesome, where there is not the slightest doubt as to who the perpetrator is, and where the guilt and criminal intent have been proved beyond even the shadow of a doubt.
The next best alternative to capital punishment is: imprisonment for the rest of the life.
I would not disagree with the sentence in either of the above two cases, considering the way both the crimes were planned and executed. However, livestreaming an execution for the whole world to see is an abhorrent idea.
YOUR VIEW
Do you think capital punishment acts as a deterrent, or should it be abolished or reserved only for the rarest of rare cases?
Tell me what you think in the comment below.