Editorial Policy: The opinions and views on the opinion page are not necessarily those of Liberty High School, Journalism Class, its adviser, or any other affiliated party.
Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the ‘punishment’ assigned to ‘utmost’ crimes. The federal government executed seventeen inmates in 2020 and three more before the 2021 presidential transition, causing controversy and outrage.
On December 11, 2020 Brandon Bernard was executed for his role in the 1999 murders of Todd and Stacie Bagley. Bernard was eighteen years old when he committed the crime and was believed to have helped light the car the two were locked in on fire. He served on federal death row for twenty years before his execution.
The Bagley family responded to the execution with a statement describing their belief that “...when someone deliberately takes the life of another, they should suffer the consequences of their actions.”
Loss and grieving are two unimaginable feelings until they occur. Yet, the death penalty cycle revolves around loss and grief, loss of a loved one promotes loss of another loved one, and so on and so forth. Is that justice when the result is more suffering?
According to the Associated Press, Bernard’s last words were of remorse: “I’m sorry, I wish I could take it all back, but I can’t.”
While the past can never be changed, the future can. This was the position the federal government was put in before sentencing Bernard. But they ignored petitions, requests, demands for his lessening of sentence, and the prosecuting attorney and jurors of the case all admitting that they were wrong.
Angela Moore, the federal prosecutor for Bernard’s case commented on IndyStar, before he was executed, “I think executing Brandon would be a terrible stain on the nation’s honor.” Gary McClung, a juror in the case, wrote in the American Constitution Society, “I was uncomfortable with a death sentence for Mr. Bernard... I believe at least one other juror shared my concerns, yet he, too, let himself be swayed by the majority.” Both the prosecutor and jurors felt they had made a wrong decision.
If the same people that wanted and even argued for Bernard to be given capital punishment could change their minds so readily- what does that say about the justice system? Or the death penalty? Perhaps that both have major flaws...
The justice system does not serve justice when motives of revenge or an eye for an eye muddle it, yet the death penalty demands it to work on these bases and the system obeys. While closure for a victim’s family should be prioritized, it should not infringe on another’s right to life.
Solutions to this issue must be considered so no more must die. Prison reform, victim-centered models for therapy and coping, and ultimately abolition of the death penalty can all provide for a firmer definition of justice in the United States. Victim’s families could be provided instant, long-lasting change without having to relive trauma for decades. Inmates could have their lives protected; for no one deserves to die. The justice system could avoid subjective definitions of “justice” and “punishment” and the power in state and government to murder could be revoked for it is neither just nor fair.
The death penalty will always be stained with murder and the only way to wipe it away is to provide victims with more. To give closure meaningfully. To spare lives and rehabilitate others for better. To allow one to fix their wrongs. To provide justice.
Cover picture courtesy of Pat Sullivan of the Associated Press.
About the writer:
Ria Sanghera is a staff writer for The Lion's Roar. You can learn more about the writer by clicking here.
Comments