My Dallas Morning News column today (which for some reason is not available online) blasts Texas Gov. Rick Perry for effectively shutting down the investigation into the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, just as the state's forensic science panel was about to hear an expert report blasting the science used to condemn Willingham to death for the alleged arson deaths of his children. In the column, I don't assume that Willingham was innocent, only that there is reason to believe that he might have been railroaded to his death. My point in the piece is that both the governor and the polity he leads should want to get to the bottom of the Willingham story, because if he really was executed on a faulty interpretation of the evidence, we should want to know that so we can close loopholes in the application of the death penalty. I find it cowardly that the governor flat-out doesn't want to know the truth -- even though a further investigation might well vindicate his actions in executing Willingham. What really makes me angry is the decision he's making not to know -- and that it involves a matter of life and death. It's also true that the only people in Texas who seem to think this is a big deal are people who are already against the death penalty, and journalists. My gut feeling is that Perry understands the electorate well. People want the death penalty more than they want to be sure we execute the truly guilty.
Because I don't assume Willingham's innocence, I stand by that column even though The Dallas Morning News reported today that the case is more complicated than death penalty opponents have acknowledged. For one thing, Craig Beyler, the arson investigator whose recent report was so critical of the methods used to condemn Willingham, only says arson wasn't proved; he doesn't say that the evidence rules out arson. For another, David Grann's famous New Yorker story about Willingham, which has made this case one of national interest, made a pretty egregious omission of fact that makes Willingham out to be more noble than he actually was in his last moments. From today's DMN story:
Stacy soon had her final encounter with her ex. This time he was strapped to a gurney in the death chamber. She was watching as he spoke."The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man - convicted of a crime I did not commit," Willingham began. "I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do. From God's dust I came and to dust I will return - so the earth shall become my throne."
The New Yorker ended its Willingham story there.
In fact, though, Willingham kept talking, first bidding farewell to people he identified only as "road dog" and "Gabby."
Then he raised one middle finger to the mother of his dead children and said, "I hope you rot in hell, bitch." The cursing became more vile from there.
At 6:13 p.m., the lethal injection began flowing, and by 6:20 p.m. he was dead. His last words were obscenities.
I appreciate very much this story in today's paper, bringing more light to the Willingham saga. Texans need to know the truth here, no matter where it leads. As I said in my column, if he really did kill his daughters, Willingham deserved to die. Obviously Willingham's being a nasty man doesn't make him guilty of murder, but it does tell us not to be so quick to make a hero out of this guy. Gov. Perry's been saying that Willingham was a "monster," and for all I know, Perry is correct. But being a monster is not the same thing as being a murderer -- though his ex-wife said today that he was both, and (for the first time) that he confessed to her that he killed their daughters to keep her from leaving him. Excerpt from Stacy Kuykendall's essay from today's Fort Worth Star-Telegram:
He asked me if I remembered the last time we had gotten into a fight and he hit me. I told him yes when I was holding Amber. He asked if I remembered what I had told him that I was going to do after the first of the year. I said that I was going to divorce you. He said the night before the fire we got in to an argument and you had said it again that you were going to divorce me. I told him yes I did say that. He told me that he believed I was going to but he couldn't let that happen. Todd told me that it was stupid but it was like an obsession. He said if I didn't have my girls I couldn't leave him and that I could never have Amber or the twins with anyone else but him. He told me he was sorry and that he hoped that I could forgive him one day. He said once again I have no right to ask you for a life sentence but Stacy no one wants to die. He said he had a lot of people fighting for him and that he would die saying that he was innocent. I looked at Todd and I told him that you are right no one wants to die and neither did my three daughters. I stood up walked out and I never looked back.
Of course, the only person who could contradict her story, which to my knowledge she has for some reason never told in this detail until now, is dead. Why did she only reveal this after the case became a big problem for the Texas governor? I'm not accusing her of anything, but I don't understand why she didn't reveal this information until now, and I don't understand the logic behind the idea that Stacy couldn't leave if she didn't have her children. I understand a vengeful husband trying to punish his wife by killing their children. Anyway, this is a bad case. I think we'd all be better off if Willingham, murderer or falsely accused innocent, were in prison without possibility of parole.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe