Related articles and links |  1 of 7

Supreme Court considers case of conversion and death penalty
All eyes are on the Supreme Court this week, at least indirectly, and it's not even June. There's Rehnquist's cancer, internet rumors that Bush is considering Thomas as chief justice, debate on the influence Sen. Arlen Specter might have over nominations, speculation on whether Alberto Gonzalez is now out of the running … and even an actual court case—the federal government's request that the Supreme Court take up the case of Oregon's assisted suicide law.

But yesterday, the justices considered another interesting case that has something to do with religion: Brown v. Payton. Weblog summarized this case back in May: It has to do with a California prosecutor's telling a jury not to consider murderer William Payton's conversion to Christianity when it sentenced him.

The legal aspects of the case are rather interesting. Everyone pretty much agrees that the prosecutor made an error — California law at that time instructed juries in capital cases to consider "any other circumstance which extenuates the gravity of the crime even though it is not a legal excuse for the crime." That would apparently include Payton's repentance. The question is over whether the prosecutor's mistake was big enough to give Payton a new hearing. The 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled last October that it was, and California appealed to the Supreme Court. The Associated Press reports, "The justices were divided over whether the errors made a difference in sentencing," with Justice David Souter saying it did. "The prosecutor stands there and twice said, 'You can't legally consider this evidence,' and the judge never corrects it," Souter noted. "Why isn't this a reasonable likelihood of error?"

Those interested in the legal aspects should check out Goldstein & Howe's SCOTUSblog, which has published several bits of analysis and summary. Those interested in the bloody details of the crime and an argument for why Payton should be executed can read the press release of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which filed an amicus curiae brief.

Weblog, however, is more interested in the religious aspects of the case. Should repentance and conversion make a difference in sentencing, capital case or not?

Back in 1998, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and others petitioned George W. Bush (then governor of Texas) to halt the execution of Karla Faye Tucker. (Those "others" include Pope John Paul II, who has more respect among evangelical Protestants than either Robertson or Falwell). Tucker had hacked two people to death with a pickax, but converted to Christianity in prison.

"She is not the same person who committed those heinous ax murders," Robertson said then. "She is totally transformed, and I think to execute her is more of an act of vengeance than it is appropriate justice."

But Weblog has searched in vain for any comments from the broadcaster or from evangelical leaders on behalf of Payton.

Weblog should note that CT hasn't said much either, though during the Tucker controversy we ran an editorial calling for the abolition of the death penalty. We had hoped that the discussion sparked by Tucker's execution (and later, by exposés in Illinois and elsewhere about dramatic problems in the system) would lead evangelicals to reconsider their support for capital punishment.

Instead, the opposite may have happened since 1998. Most notably, Prison Fellowship Ministries founder Charles Colson abandoned his earlier opposition to capital punishment, calling it "an essential element of justice." (Colson's essay detailing his change of heart has recently been circulating as if it's new. It's actually from 2002.)

next page... |  1 of 7

share this page

November (Web-only) 2004, Vol. 48