Whats the deal about this Tookie Williams guy?

[Thinking Skins]

Some of us get what you are saying.

I have stayed out of it because as a known liberal perpetrator on this board, sometimes it seems that if I say anything, the posts fly in with: "oh, here comes San Francisco again" or some such nonsense, and the whole thing gets derailed.

You were defending yourself just fine, so I stayed out of it.

I appreciate that.

[niyahisacutie]

((I'm so late on this topic))

Though I dont agree with what Tookie did some 25 years ago, I dont agree with him being executed. I dont agree with the death penalty at all for that matter. In my opinion, he'll suffer more by living with those demons and living with the fact that he killed four people. The state of California (or no other state) should be given the right to take another man's life. Two wrongs dont make it right. And what do you get out of executing Tookie? Those four people will not be reincarnated. Those families are still without their loved ones. Fools still out here "banging" and shooting up people for no apparent reason. The only thing that comes out of this is that yet another life is gone and there's an empty bed on Death Row. Nothing good comes out of the deal, so why even do it?

Another thing that bothers me is the fact that you let him live for 25 extra years, turn his life around and get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize? Who is the state of California to say that he's not sincere. THey're not his maker. They are not the ones he has to answer too on judgement day. They dont determine his ultimate fate.

But, to each its own. I know some of you will not agree with me, and I respect that completely. I also respect your opinions and no matter how much we go back and forth about the subject, it will change nothing.

[DeanCollins]

What are you talking about? What you say is great, but help me unerstand how it relates to anything I've said.

I apologize if you think I concentrate on race too much, but its just ignorant to say that the problems regarding race have just evaporated into thin air.

There is a fine line ( and a double standard) when talking about racial issues specifically. It's apparentness is demonstrated by what's not being said, in answer to your comments (hence this thread would be closed). But plenty was said, just not what you wanted to hear which, I'm assuming, words that would validate your argument. You have the right to your opinion, whether it is shared is left to others. My advice, talk about something we all can agree on, like politics :laugh:

[BlueTalon]

why should you get the death penalty if you killed one person??

Because one person is valuable? Simply because a multiple murderer is more deserving of the death penalty doesn't mean a single murderer isn't deserving of it. I think the family members of that one person would agree.

[BlueTalon]

Compare these two facts about the US policies on the Death Pealty:

1) A Black Person has NEVER been convicted of killing a White Person and LIVED!

2) A White Person has NEVER been convicted of killing a Black Person and DIED!

Those two facts alone should put some doubt into your heads about the death penalty. I mean, is Person A's life more valuable than Person B's?

The grossly disproportionate race statistics of the victims of capital punishment strongly foretell that this nation can never fairly decide who will live and who will die.

The failure of the system to impose death on the takers of black life sends the message that black life is not as valuable as white life.

Here's a clue, for free. You're wrong.

In 1998, James Byrd Jr., a black man, was murdered by Lawrence Russell Brewer, John William King, and Shawn Allen Berry, all white. In case you don't remember, they beat the **** out of him, and then towed him behind their pickup. King and Brewer were sentenced to die, Berry received a life sentence. Personally, I would have prefered that the third white guy also get the death penalty -- if there is any accusation to be made about lack of justice in the system, that would be it. Not that the numbers of people actually receiving the death penalty are misrepresentative, but that not nearly enough people receive it.

So, suomynonA, are you going to try to make the case that King and Brewer don't deserve the death penalty and shouldn't be put to death?

Tookie Williams murdered four people. He deserved what he got.

And think about it -- if he'd have received clemency in any way because of childrens books he wrote, it would have just been the beginning of a deluge of childrens books authored by death-row inmates. Behavior that is rewarded gets repeated.

[BlueTalon]

Bump.

suomynonA made the case that blacks get executed for killing whites but whites don't get executed for killing blacks, and I'd really like to see him address the James Byrd murder case.

Boobiemiles indicated an economic element to the application of the death penalty. Would he support the execution of Byrd's murderers? Would rincewind, Mooka, Predicto or Winslowalrob? (Note: I'm asking the question, not making a statement.)

And if not, what case would they make for the murderers deserving not to die?

[Thinking Skins]

Here's a clue, for free. You're wrong.

In 1998, James Byrd Jr., a black man, was murdered by Lawrence Russell Brewer, John William King, and Shawn Allen Berry, all white. In case you don't remember, they beat the **** out of him, and then towed him behind their pickup. King and Brewer were sentenced to die, Berry received a life sentence. Personally, I would have prefered that the third white guy also get the death penalty -- if there is any accusation to be made about lack of justice in the system, that would be it. Not that the numbers of people actually receiving the death penalty are misrepresentative, but that not nearly enough people receive it.

So, suomynonA, are you going to try to make the case that King and Brewer don't deserve the death penalty and shouldn't be put to death?

Tookie Williams murdered four people. He deserved what he got.

And think about it -- if he'd have received clemency in any way because of childrens books he wrote, it would have just been the beginning of a deluge of childrens books authored by death-row inmates. Behavior that is rewarded gets repeated.

If thats the case then I'll update my stats.

But the problem I have with this thread is that I made a statement based on my own research, and posted links that have found similar results.

But rather than address the problem with the death penalty I'm trying to address, I'm being forced to address the word 'NEVER'.

The point that I want to make with this is that if you look at the murders who recieve the death penalty, Blacks are executed for killing whites at an exponentially greater rate than the Whites who are executed for killing Blacks.

To that point, the only answers I've gotten are:

"so are you against the criminal justice system..."

"man, you're crazy"

"that was the 60's, its all peace and love now"

Race plays a part in the application of the death penalty and that makes it an unjust penalty because it is applied at different rates. This is one of the reasons I am opposed to the death penalty.

Regarding Tookie Williams in particular, I didn't make any argument about him in particular because you can't say someone DESERVES clemency. Clemency is granted as a favor, and the Governor has the right to decide who to grant it to.

But whenever I see a Black man get executed, I think about the statement I posted earlier. Maybe the word 'NEVER' doesn't belong there. So you can replace it with RARELY. You can use any word you want as long as you understand that the criminal justice system is far more likely to execute somewone who killed a White man than someone who killed a Black man.

[Thinking Skins]

Bump.

suomynonA made the case that blacks get executed for killing whites but whites don't get executed for killing blacks, and I'd really like to see him address the James Byrd murder case.

Boobiemiles indicated an economic element to the application of the death penalty. Would he support the execution of Byrd's murderers? Would rincewind, Mooka, Predicto or Winslowalrob? (Note: I'm asking the question, not making a statement.)

And if not, what case would they make for the murderers deserving not to die?

I'm very happy that you did the research to find a White man who killed a Black and was issued death. But if you're going to research the issue, you've got to look at all sides:

How about looking for examples of Whites who kill Blacks and LIVE?

Or Blacks who kill Whites and LIVE?

and finally, Blacks who kill Whites and DIE?

I gurantee you the first and last sets will be easy to find examples of, but you're gonna need a lot of coffee if you look into the second set.

[dreamingwolf]

ok anonymous

how many white people should have to be executed before a black person is to be executed?

Should people who murder someone of the opposite race be excused from wrong doing, cause that crime doesnt happen with a good enough statistical average among the races to sate your need for equality?

If we are to statistically marry capital punishment to race, and there becomes an inballance of black infractors on death row should the state encourage white people to murder black people so we can make up the balance or just randomly select white people to execute to make up the difference?

[Thinking Skins]

ok anonymous

how many white people should have to be executed before a black person is to be executed?

Should people who murder someone of the opposite race be excused from wrong doing, cause that crime doesnt happen with a good enough statistical average among the races to sate your need for equality?

If we are to statistically marry capital punishment to race, and there becomes an inballance of black infractors on death row should the state encourage white people to murder black people so we can make up the balance or just randomly select white people to execute to make up the difference?

I'm not in favor of placing some kind of 'quotas' on the death penalty. All I want is for people to admit that there is an imbalance in the way the penalty is given out.

If you are willing to recognize that imbalance, then you should consider that next time you're discussing the death penalty with somebody; or the next time you're on a jury about to give life imprisonment or the death penalty to somebody. Just consider the imbalance.

It would be stupid to make a law that says "For every Black man executed, a White man must also be executed. " And Thats not what I'm advocating for.

I just want the citizens, who are going around talking about the death penalty to understand. Because if we can agree that this is a problem, maybe we can get into deeper discussions about the death penalty without just thinking of me as Jesse Jackson because I mention race.

[BlueTalon]

suomynonA, a big part of the problem as I see it is that your research is messed up. The case I cited was a very famous and notorious case -- how on earth could you overlook it? It was a centerpiece of the 2000 presidential election! Gore was using it as a platform for saying we need more hate-crime legislation, and Bush was using it to say there was no need for any such legislation.

So, I don't know where you get your stats, but it seems to be rather selective if the James Byrd case didn't show up in them.

My point in bringing it up was twofold -- to demonstrate that your assessment of the justice system (with regards to the death penalty) is incorrect, and to make the point that the application of the death penalty is on a case by case basis. I can't see where there would be any systemic racial bias. It may be true that an individual just could make a decision at least partially based on race... but I think that most any jury that is soft-headed enough to not condemn to death a white murderer of a black victim will also be soft-headed enough to not condemn a black murderer of a white victim to death. Conversely, a jury that is hard-hearted enough to condemn a black murderer of a white victim to death will also be hard-hearted enough to condemn a white murderer of a black victim.

Someone earlier in the thread made a point about the nation's history and lynching blacks. Those days are thankfully gone -- but the point can just as easily be made about dragging a black man behind a pickup. That happened not long ago. A few people in today's society chose to do that. The fact that they chose to do that is reprehensible, but should not be taken as a reflection of society in general.

Plus, anyone who thinks about dragging a black man behind their pickup in Texas knows exactly what will happen to them if they do it.

[Thinking Skins]

suomynonA, a big part of the problem as I see it is that your research is messed up. The case I cited was a very famous and notorious case -- how on earth could you overlook it? It was a centerpiece of the 2000 presidential election! Gore was using it as a platform for saying we need more hate-crime legislation, and Bush was using it to say there was no need for any such legislation.

So, I don't know where you get your stats, but it seems to be rather selective if the James Byrd case didn't show up in them.

My point in bringing it up was twofold -- to demonstrate that your assessment of the justice system (with regards to the death penalty) is incorrect, and to make the point that the application of the death penalty is on a case by case basis. I can't see where there would be any systemic racial bias. It may be true that an individual just could make a decision at least partially based on race... but I think that most any jury that is soft-headed enough to not condemn to death a white murderer of a black victim will also be soft-headed enough to not condemn a black murderer of a white victim to death. Conversely, a jury that is hard-hearted enough to condemn a black murderer of a white victim to death will also be hard-hearted enough to condemn a white murderer of a black victim.

Someone earlier in the thread made a point about the nation's history and lynching blacks. Those days are thankfully gone -- but the point can just as easily be made about dragging a black man behind a pickup. That happened not long ago. A few people in today's society chose to do that. The fact that they chose to do that is reprehensible, but should not be taken as a reflection of society in general.

Plus, anyone who thinks about dragging a black man behind their pickup in Texas knows exactly what will happen to them if they do it.

If you dont want to accept the stats then do the research yourself. Its not hard to find info backing up my data. I did it earlier in a matter of seconds.

Even if you go to a pro-death penalty site, they accept that these stats are true and try to find excuses for them.

Let me ask you this, how much does your heart hurt when you hear about a non-American guy over in Iraq who dies? Compare that with how your heart feels when an American guy over there dies.

Its not an isomorphic parallel, but people place value on how much it hurts to see a person die. And as a result of this, whether we recognize it or not, people are penalized differently.

[BlueTalon]

If you dont want to accept the stats then do the research yourself. Its not hard to find info backing up my data. I did it earlier in a matter of seconds.

Even if you go to a pro-death penalty site, they accept that these stats are true and try to find excuses for them.

Let me ask you this, how much does your heart hurt when you hear about a non-American guy over in Iraq who dies? Compare that with how your heart feels when an American guy over there dies.

Its not an isomorphic parallel, but people place value on how much it hurts to see a person die. And as a result of this, whether we recognize it or not, people are penalized differently.

If it took you seconds to do your research, it should come as no surprise that there a holes in it.

To correctly answer your question about deaths in Iraq, it's necessary to break the Iraqi deaths into at least two broad categories -- terrorists, and terrorist victims. I have no bad feelings at all about a terrorist getting killed (and personally, I hope it was a slow agonizing death). I feel bad for the Iraqi victims of terrorist atrocities. I also feel bad for the Americans there who die, but most of those are servicemen who have volunteered and taken the oath, and who are paid to be in harm's way. (I'm a Marine, in case you didn't know. That's my perspective.)

To more directly address your point, I am no closer to (or farther away from) James Byrd than I am to Daniel Pearl or Nick Berg. I firmly believe that the perpetrators in all cases should be punished, and pay with their lives.

[Thinking Skins]

To more directly address your point, I am no closer to (or farther away from) James Byrd than I am to Daniel Pearl or Nick Berg. I firmly believe that the perpetrators in all cases should be punished, and pay with their lives.

I'm very happy to hear (read) you make that statement. But I find it hard to believe that that concept is upheld across America.

[Thinking Skins]

If it took you seconds to do your research, it should come as no surprise that there a holes in it.

It didn't take seconds to do my research.

It took seconds to find others who did similar research and came up with similar results.

You can ignore the first statement I made altogether. But does that erase the stories I posted that back up my comments?

If you like I can find more people who agree with me, if not on the word NEVER, definately if I change it to RARELY.

I asked earlier if I needed to keep posting sources, would you like me to post more?

How many people need to find these same facts before you're willing to accept them?

[BlueTalon]

I'm very happy to hear (read) you make that statement. But I find it hard to believe that that concept is upheld across America.

I think my sentiments might be a little more widespread than you suspect.

[Thinking Skins]

I think my sentiments might be a little more widespread than you suspect.

I dont think there's am accurate way of mesuring this so we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

[dreamingwolf]

I'm not in favor of placing some kind of 'quotas' on the death penalty. All I want is for people to admit that there is an imbalance in the way the penalty is given out.

If you are willing to recognize that imbalance, then you should consider that next time you're discussing the death penalty with somebody; or the next time you're on a jury about to give life imprisonment or the death penalty to somebody. Just consider the imbalance.

It would be stupid to make a law that says "For every Black man executed, a White man must also be executed. " And Thats not what I'm advocating for.

I just want the citizens, who are going around talking about the death penalty to understand. Because if we can agree that this is a problem, maybe we can get into deeper discussions about the death penalty without just thinking of me as Jesse Jackson because I mention race.

that is what your saying though. Your saying that the death penalty is unfair based on statistics. Your ignoring all the other dynamics that go into and focusing on race. Wether you realize it or not, your argument is based on the death penalty being unfair cause of a statistical inbalance based on race.

Even your suggestions say that. "think of that if your on a jury" which sounds like "if your on a jury for a blackman thats up for capital punishment vote against it just cause hes black cause theres a statistical imbalance, if hes white vote for it cause theres a statistical imbalance.

So since your not up for the sacrificial white person, I guess the best method for you would be to inform juries of the racial imbalance untill white people catch up(Im guessing you will take no less that population %) regardless of how much the defendant warrants capital punishment by law.

[Thinking Skins]

that is what your saying though. Your saying that the death penalty is unfair based on statistics. Your ignoring all the other dynamics that go into and focusing on race. Wether you realize it or not, your argument is based on the death penalty being unfair cause of a statistical inbalance based on race.

Even your suggestions say that. "think of that if your on a jury" which sounds like "if your on a jury for a blackman thats up for capital punishment vote against it just cause hes black cause theres a statistical imbalance, if hes white vote for it cause theres a statistical imbalance.

So since your not up for the sacrificial white person, I guess the best method for you would be to inform juries of the racial imbalance untill white people catch up(Im guessing you will take no less that population %) regardless of how much the defendant warrants capital punishment by law.

You're taking my words and flying off Mt Everest.

I dont want any kind of a 'formal' action taken. There's nothing that I can think of that would improve this stat other than PEOPLE THEMSELVES changing their opinions of things.

As somebody said earlier, that the death penalty really hurts the poor people. Maybe thats true. Maybe America has stopped hating Blacks and turned its attention to those on Welfare.

But the fact remains that, whether you choose to believe that the statements I made about Race and the Death Penalty are true or not, The Decision of whether a man should live or die is being put into a set of people's hands. And the true question becomes, do I trust these people to do whats right?

Sorry, I'm voting in the negative, and thats one reason why I'm against the Death Penalty

[BlueTalon]

You're taking my words and flying off Mt Everest.

I dont want any kind of a 'formal' action taken. There's nothing that I can think of that would improve this stat other than PEOPLE THEMSELVES changing their opinions of things.

As somebody said earlier, that the death penalty really hurts the poor people. Maybe thats true. Maybe America has stopped hating Blacks and turned its attention to those on Welfare.

But the fact remains that, whether you choose to believe that the statements I made about Race and the Death Penalty are true or not, The Decision of whether a man should live or die is being put into a set of people's hands. And the true question becomes, do I trust these people to do whats right?

Sorry, I'm voting in the negative, and thats one reason why I'm against the Death Penalty

Your perspective is mind-boggling to me. "The death penalty hurts the poor people"...? WTF? What about the poor victims of the poor criminals? Perhaps people on the upper end of the economic ladder simply don't engage in capital crimes as often as poorer people.

You should have said "The decision of whether a convicted murderer should live or die is being put into a set of people's hands". You used the word "man". The "man" gave up his humanity when he offed someone or someones.

So you don't trust a jury of your peers to do the right thing or come up with the right decision? Let me ask you about the Byrd case. The three white guys brutally killed Byrd, dragging him behind their truck until the body was decapitated by a culvert. Byrd's family wanted the death penalty. Given all that, would you support the death penalty for Byrd's murderers? If not, what justification do you have for keeping them alive?

[Thinking Skins]

Your perspective is mind-boggling to me. "The death penalty hurts the poor people"...? WTF? What about the poor victims of the poor criminals? Perhaps people on the upper end of the economic ladder simply don't engage in capital crimes as often as poorer people.

Whoa there, this isn't my argument; I was just trying to offer an opinion that DIFFERED FROM mine. Everybody keeps telling me that race plays no part in the application of the death penalty, so I', saying that even if I go along with that, you haven't gotten past the fundamental part of my bringing race into the debate about the death penalty. The application of this punishment is based on human emotions, rage, and a corrupt legal system.

Given these widely discussed flaws, I just find it hard to believe that the decision of whether a man should live or die is being made by sound individuals.

I dont want to bring another part of my character into this discussion, but I can't help but speak my thoughts. Life and death are precious things that I just dont think that man has the power to govern over.

You should have said "The decision of whether a convicted murderer should live or die is being put into a set of people's hands". You used the word "man". The "man" gave up his humanity when he offed someone or someones.

So you don't trust a jury of your peers to do the right thing or come up with the right decision? Let me ask you about the Byrd case. The three white guys brutally killed Byrd, dragging him behind their truck until the body was decapitated by a culvert. Byrd's family wanted the death penalty. Given all that, would you support the death penalty for Byrd's murderers? If not, what justification do you have for keeping them alive?

I would keep them alive for the mere fact that I DONT SUPPORT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. Even for the most racist member of the KKK, I'm not gonna support killing him.

[BlueTalon]

The statement "The death penalty hurts the [whatever] people" just struck me as absurd. It doesn't matter if the group of people are catagorized by race or economics -- the death penalty applied to an individual doesn't harm a group, it kills an individual.

Your arguments against the death penalty are a bit circular. You claim that capital punishment is applied using "human emotions, rage, and a corrupt legal system", and "Given these widely discussed flaws, I just find it hard to believe that the decision of whether a man should live or die is being made by sound individuals." I would argue that the first quote is factually incorrect (as is your statement "Life and death are precious things that I just dont think that man has the power to govern over"), but nevertheless, you present your opposition to the death penalty as being a reaction to uncertainty, more or less. In other words, you don't know that the legal system isn't corrupt, and you don't know that the people bringing the verdict and passing the sentence are sound enough. Yet you categorically state that you don't support capital punishment regardless of the circumstances. Interesting.

A related question -- Do you believe it is OK to kill someone in self defense, or in the defense of someone else?

By the way, I don't support capital punishment even for the most racist member of the KKK, either. Racism isn't a capital crime. But if our racist young KKK member kidnaps or rapes or murders someone, then I fully support putting him to death. I'd even volunteer to pull the switch, push the button, pull the trigger, jab the needle, whatever.

[The Sir]

Found this on another website. Interesting read, a little long though.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT IS BETTER THAN A MEAL

{Farewell to Stanley Tookie Williams by KRS ONE}

They killed the teacher! Said Snoop Dogg at the funeral services for Stanley Tookie Williams yesterday at the Bethel A.M.E. Church in Los Angeles. Rev. Jesse Jackson, Bruce Gordon, Minister Tony Muhammad, Stan Muhammad, Rev. Dr. Lewis E. Logan II, Minister Lewis Farrakhan and Tony Robbins all listened as Snoop Dogg brought the packed Church to its feet with a poem dedicated to Tookie entitled; Till We Meet Again. One line that caught my attention was when Snoop said, food for thought is better than a meal. This phrase stuck with me because it reminded me of man may not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedth from the mouth of the lord and coming from Snoop showed a level of maturity that I wish his Girls Gon Wild, pimps up hoes down, gansta "n-word" audiences would adopt.

And I am NOT being critical of Snoop at all! Ive been watching Snoop settle his beefs with others, start programs in the hood for at risk youth, seek God and denounce gang-banging publicly. But this is my point. When has a man done enough to be called rehabilitated? What must one do to be actually free from past wrongs? When is a man truly forgiven?

I arrived at the Bethel A.M.E. Church to a beautiful scene. Several blocks before we got to the Church helpful, pleasantly spoken, informative Black and Brown police officers were stationed at strategic corners directing traffic toward the Church. When we arrived at the Church we were greeted by the Fruit of Islam (F.O.I.) and escorted to the press balcony. There was literally nowhere else to be. Even members of Stanley Tookie Williams family were in the press balcony! When this was discovered, Rev. Dr. Logan II requested that the first ten rows of people give up their seats to these additional members of the Williams family and everyone promptly did what was asked.

The Church was so packed that many people were in another room outside of the main knave watching the proceedings on a huge flat screen television. When I walked into this room I saw Tookie on the screen saying, If a man must fight, let it be to the death against the beast within himself. Win that battle? No man, no woman, no racial hatred, no system, no vindictiveness, and no Machiavellianism can ever defeat you! And then he said on behalf of the children; teach them how to avoid our destructive foot steps. Teach them to strive for a higher education. Teach them to promote peace. And teach them to focus on rebuilding the neighborhoods that you, others and I helped to destroy. And I cant front, I was renewed even in my own spirit. To know that one of the most significant outlaw figures in modern American history went from criminal minded to spiritual minded gives all of us (especially those on the frontlines of ministry work, counseling, mentoring and rehabilitation work) hope in the transformation of the human heart. That our work is not done in vain.

I was totally impressed with the organization and security of the F.O.I. Hundreds of people was jammed in the Church with even more people outside trying to get in. Yet the Church and the whole block itself (Western Ave) was at peace. It was beautiful.

But as beautiful as it was, the Church was still teeming with suspicion as to why a completely rehabilitated man could not be offered at least life in prison? How was Tookie (the co-founder of the famous street gang the Crips) who spent 24 years in prison, wrote nine anti-violence, anti-gang, anti-drug childrens books, received an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree from St. Moses the Black Theological Seminary, was nominated six times for the Nobel Peace Prize, and received the Presidential Call to Service Award from President George W. Bush for his volunteer efforts to help steer youth away from gang lifenot rehabilitated? Theres even an award winning movie starring Jamie Foxx entitled; Redemption: the Stan Tookie Williams Story that teaches the path of rehabilitation and forgiveness. All of this, in addition to his website and phone mentoring of young people from prison, and let us not forget his plea of innocence, could not have granted this man a stay of execution. He had to die? He was that dangerous to society? Well, no one at the funeral thought so.

Tookie is dead, said Rev. Jesse Jackson. We must kill the idea of killing to stop killing. Remembering his own prayer time with Tookie, Rev. Jackson quoted Tookie saying; I admit I was a predator upon my people. We were programmed to attack Black people. Whites were safe around us; I will not be killed for what I did do, but for what I didnt do. Id rather die than lie to get clemency. And the whole Church erupted in applause and cheering! It was like they were ALL used to this process of having to lie along with the police and the District Attorney in hopes of achieving lighter sentences or no jail time at all and Tookie represented that person that never snitched or sold out to the corruption of the Judicial system. Id rather die than lie for clemency seemed to resonate with everyone there dealing with an already proven to be corrupt California corrections/prison system.

As Rev. Jesse Jackson brought to mind the fact that Charles Manson who is responsible for killing pregnant Sharon Tate and seven others is still alive in California on death row and that President John F. Kennedys assassin is also still alive, I was reading some of Tookies own words of transformation in a booklet that was being handed out throughout the Church. One paragraph read; Its impossible for a discriminable mind to fathom the miraculous transition of a redeemed soul. Contrary to the popular misconception, redemption is not a biblical ethos, exclusive to saints, prophets, elitists or the holier-than-thou. It is of earthly accessibility through human initiative. I aver that the process of being redeemed is available to any individual regardless of gender, race, color, creed, social stratum or background. Yes, even a wretched Black man, akin to the former me, can transform and be redeemed.

As I read this, I couldnt help asking myself over and over again, did Tookie have to die? Did Tookie have to die? Did Stan Tookie Williams really have to die? Son, husband, father of two, grandfather of three, minister, changed man. Was there no other way to pay that debt back to society other than the execution of a transformed man who held on to his claim of innocence all the way to the end? Tookie had to die? I dont think so. However, I find myself at a peculiar cross road in American history. First of all it should be clear to all that the title Department of Corrections is false. No one entering the prison industrial complex is being rehabilitated or rather corrected. With Tookies death it seems that no matter what you do to correct your past errors, the American justice system will still show you no mercy. Once a criminal, always a criminal.

Secondly, the idea of an Austrian born White man using the American legal system to murder a Louisiana born Black man just doesnt sit well with me. And I am not being selective or even prejudice here. But does Governor Schwarzenegger really know enough about American history, even African American history to have made a just decision on Stanley Tookie Williams life? Does Governor Schwarzeneggar care anything about the message he is sending throughout the African American community; especially to African American youths? Stanley Tookie Williams murder by the State also proves the powerlessness of the African American community and its leadership. But I wont get into that here.

Finally. In a time when Americas State and Federal agencies are being severely criticized for their seeming lack of care for the suffering of African Americans in wake of Hurricane Katrina, Governor Schwarzeneggar missed an important opportunity to restore African American hope in the Department of Corrections and America as a whole. While African Americans are dying by the dozen in Iraq, Tookies execution by the same regime African Americans are defending seems a little hypocriticaljustice wise. In a time of so much racial disunity and mass American despair due to mass unemployment, now might not be a good time for Americans to be murdering Americans legally or illegally. Governor Schwarzeneggar could have set a new precedent for our time as Americans by turning away from violence and granting Stanley Tookie Williams clemency. But thats all over now. Violence wins again! Or did it?

Tookie admitted his wrongs and paid the price of total transformation. Before his execution he talked a lot about being redeemed meaning to recover ownership of something by paying a specified sum for it. In a spiritual sense; meaning to restore to wholeness, to be saved from a sinful state of being, to return to honor and self-worth, to be free from guilt. In his last moments on earth Tookie wrote; Here and now, I bear witness that Gods bequest of redemption has replenished me with a mission and revealed that the impossible is possible. This is a strong affirmation for us today.

Stan Tookie Williams was murdered by the State of California on December 13th, 2005. We will miss you, teacher.

KRS ONE...

[BlueTalon]

When has a man done enough to be called rehabilitated? What must one do to be actually free from past wrongs? When is a man truly forgiven?

And teach them to focus on rebuilding the neighborhoods that you, others and I helped to destroy.

But as beautiful as it was, the Church was still teeming with suspicion as to why a completely rehabilitated man could not be offered at least life in prison? How was Tookie (the co-founder of the famous street gang the Crips) who spent 24 years in prison, wrote nine anti-violence, anti-gang, anti-drug childrens books, received an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree from St. Moses the Black Theological Seminary, was nominated six times for the Nobel Peace Prize, and received the Presidential Call to Service Award from President George W. Bush for his volunteer efforts to help steer youth away from gang lifenot rehabilitated? Theres even an award winning movie starring Jamie Foxx entitled; Redemption: the Stan Tookie Williams Story that teaches the path of rehabilitation and forgiveness. All of this, in addition to his website and phone mentoring of young people from prison, and let us not forget his plea of innocence, could not have granted this man a stay of execution.

He had to die? He was that dangerous to society? Well, no one at the funeral thought so.

Tookie saying; I admit I was a predator upon my people. We were programmed to attack Black people.

Id rather die than lie to get clemency.

Tookie represented that person that never snitched or sold out to the corruption of the Judicial system. Id rather die than lie for clemency seemed to resonate with everyone there dealing with an already proven to be corrupt California corrections/prison system.

As Rev. Jesse Jackson brought to mind the fact that Charles Manson who is responsible for killing pregnant Sharon Tate and seven others is still alive in California on death row and that President John F. Kennedys assassin is also still alive, I was reading some of Tookies own words of transformation in a booklet that was being handed out throughout the Church. One paragraph read; Its impossible for a discriminable mind to fathom the miraculous transition of a redeemed soul. Contrary to the popular misconception, redemption is not a biblical ethos, exclusive to saints, prophets, elitists or the holier-than-thou. It is of earthly accessibility through human initiative. I aver that the process of being redeemed is available to any individual regardless of gender, race, color, creed, social stratum or background. Yes, even a wretched Black man, akin to the former me, can transform and be redeemed.

...the idea of an Austrian born White man using the American legal system to murder a Louisiana born Black man just doesnt sit well with me.

I don't know who KRS ONE is, but he's either confused or he deliberately distorts the truth.

Forgiveness is a function of God and of people, not of the state. The families of Tookie's victims can forgive him, if they so choose. The state has no such capacity -- were it to try to forgive, it would be usurping the right of the victims' families either to forgive or not to forgive.

Apparently Tookie freely admitted to destroying neighborhoods...

It's a rash assumption to assume Tookie was "completely rehabilitated." It doesn't matter what kind of laundry list can be put together in support of Tookie -- he murdered four people. The travesty in all this is why it took so long for the sentence to be carried out. He got 24 extra years -- how on earth can anyone argue that the system was unfair to him?

If noone at the funeral thought Tookie was a threat to society, it's only because they were biased to the point of not dealing with reality.

So Tookie was a self-admitted predator on his own people, but he never lied and never snitched. How commendable. So we're supposed to believe that he was rehabilitated, and was no threat to society -- so much so that he protected his fellow thugs in prison by not snitching. He protected his brothaz from society, rather than the other way around. So he apparently thought the code was worth more than the law. Perhaps the people in that church think that's commendable, but it doesn't do much for the rest of us in society.

BTW, Charles Manson WAS sentenced to death. But stupid liberal judges decided they knew better than everyone else and overturned the death penalty for several years. And after it was reinstated, Rose Bird, liberal Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court, decided that the state of California didn't know what it was doing when it overwhelmingly passed a referendum re-legalizing the death penalty, and blocked the election results from taking effect -- until she was given the boot a short time later. So now, as a result of those stupid decisions, Charles Manson is still breathing, using up health care resources and serving as an example of what the Tookie supporters wanted for Tookie.

ANYBODY who compares what the state did to Tookie to what Tookie did to his victims, by calling it murder, has lost his/her capacity for rational thought.

[Thinking Skins]

Forgiveness is a function of God and of people, not of the state.

If this is a true statement, then why is there an option for clemency? Why is there a possibility of getting parole after a certain number of years in prison?

You're saying that the job of the state is to rule with an iron fist, but it seems that the people who make the laws in the state disagree, else they would not allow themselves these options.