DEATH PENALTY IN THE USA

There are currently 38 states with death penalty:

Number of executions since 1976

There are currently 12 states without death penalty:

HISTORY OF THE DEATH PENALTY

Since ancient times capital punishment has been used to punish a wide variety of offences. The Bible prescribes death for murder and many other crimes, including kidnapping and witchcraft.

By 1500 in England, only major felonies carried out the death penalty for such capital offences as treason, murder, larceny, burglary, rape, and arson. Some common methods of execution at that time were boiling, burning at the stake, hanging, beheading, and drawing and quartering.

The Death Penalty in America

When European settlers came to the new world, they brought the practice of capital punishment. Great Britain influenced America's use of the death penalty more than any other country.

By 1800, however, Parliament had enacted many new capital offences, and hundreds of persons were being sentenced to death each year.

Reform of the death penalty began in Europe with the abolitionist movement by the 1750s, and was championed by such thinkers as the Italian jurist Cesare Beccaria, the French philosopher Voltaire, and the English law reformer Jeremy Bentham. They argued that the death penalty was needlessly cruel, overrated as a deterrent, and occasionally imposed in fatal error. In Cesare Beccaria´s essay On Crimes and Punishment (1767) he theorized that there was no justification for the state to take a life. Along with Quaker leaders and other social reformers, they defended life imprisonment as a mare rational alternative.

Nineteenth Century

In the early Nineteenth Century, many states reduced their number of capital crimes and build state penitentiaries.</DIV><DIV ALIGN=LEFT>

In the United States the death penalty for murder was first abolished in Michigan (1846), Venezuela (1853) and Portugal (1867) were the first nations to abolish it altogether. Today, it is virtually abolished in all of Western Europe and most of Latin America. Elsewhere-in Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East (except Israel)-most countries still authorise capital punishment for many crimes.

Twentieth Century

It was the first half of the Twentieth Century that marked the beginning of the "Progressive Period" of reform in the United States. Nine states abolished the death penalty for all crimes or strictly limited it to rarely committed crimes of treason and first-degree murder. By the 1930s American abolitionist movement lost support as Americans suffered through Prohibition and the Great Depression. At this point of time executions reached the highest levels in American history. 

Constitutionality of the Death Penalty in America

In 1967, executions were suspended to allow the courts of appeal to decide whether the death penalty was unconstitutional. In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled in Furman V. Georgia that the death penalty for murder or for rape violated the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" if it was too severe for a crime, if it was arbitrary, if it offended society's sense of justice, or if it was not more effective than a less severe penalty. The Court argued that there are problems with the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases that lead to

"freakish" irregularity. So the use of capital punishment was "arbitrary" and "cruel". On June 29, 1972, for the first time in U.S. history, the Supreme Court effectively voided 40 death penalty statutes and suspended the death penalty.

Most of the states enacted new death penalty statutes. Some states removed all of the jury discretion by mandating capital punishment for those convicted of capital crimes. Other states provided sentencing guidelines for the judge and jury when deciding whether to impose death. However, in 1976 the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia held that these statutes are not unconstitutional (Gregg decision). Capital status now typically authorise the trial court to impose sentence (death or life) only after a post conviction hearing, at which evidence is submitted to establish which "aggravating" or "mitigating" factors were present in the crime. If the "aggravating" factors prevail and the sentence is death, then the case is automatically reviewed by an appellate court. The final reform from Gregg was proportionality review, a practice that helps the state to identify and eliminate sentencing disparities.

In 1977, however, the Supreme Court also ruled that the death penalty for rape of an adult woman was an unconstitutional punishment when the victim was not killed (Coker v. Georgia).

In 1988, a new federal death penalty statute was enacted for murder in the course of a drug-kingpin conspiracy. Since its enactment, 6 people have been sentenced to death for violating this law, though none has been executed.

In 1994, President Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that expanded the federal death penalty some 60 crimes, only 4 of which do not involve murder. The four exceptions are espionage; treason; drug trafficking in large amounts; and attempting, authorizing, or advising the killing of a public official, juror, or witness in cases involving a continuing criminal enterprise.

Two years later, in 1996, President Clinton signed the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The Act, which affects both state and federal prisoners, restricts review in federal courts by establishing tighter filing deadlines, limits the opportunity for evidentiary hearings, and allows only a single habeas corpus filing.

George W. Bush, governor of Texas since 1994, supports the death penalty for murderers at the age of 17 and older. Bush is confident that none of 112 executed were innocent. In his 6 years as governor, Bush has presided over the executions of 111 men and 1 woman, far more than any other governor. By any measure, his commitment to capital punishment is unquestioned. By law, the governor alone cannot commute a death sentence. But Bush has appointed every member of the parole board that can make that decision, and eliminated parole for violent criminals. Bush signed a law speeding the appeals process -and, therefore, executions. Bush changed Texas' clemency process, so that there is only a death penalty clemency for bad process not for repentance. He supports death penalty as a deterrent.

Bush said in 1998, "For the 4 years I've been governor, I am confident we have not executed an innocent person, and I'm confident that the system has worked to make sure there is full access to the courts."

(New York Times; Jan 7, 2000)

Karla Faye Tucker, the one and only woman who received a death sentence under Bush, did not argue that she was innocent or that she had been deprived of her legal rights. She asked for mercy as reward for a life redeemed through faith. Bush cited his duty to carry out the execution: "My responsibility is to ensure our laws are enforced fairly and evenly without preference or special treatment," he said. "I have concluded judgments about the heart and soul of an individual on death row are best left to a higher authority."

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court of the United States is composed of a chief justice and eight associate justices. Their positions are life-long appointments. They read statutes and the text of the Constitution, and they also considered other policy cases. But they decide cases based on what the law is, not what the polls show. The Supreme Court is housed in a small room deep inside the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.

The Supreme Court of the United States servers two functions.

It is first a court of law; as such it is the highest court in the land, with a final authority over the federal or the state courts. It becomes guides for every judge and lawyer in the nation.

It is also a political institution in the sense that it exerts a commanding influence on public policies of the United States. The high court is the top of the judicial system of the United States government.

The Supreme Court is primarily a court of appeals. Cases generally reach the Court either from the lower federal courts or from the state supreme courts. When a litigant who loses in a lower court wishes to take the case to the Supreme Court, he may send a request for a hearing, whether by appeal or certiorari (a writ that commands judges of inferior courts to return records or certify proceedings for review by a higher court), to the office of the chief justice, who circulates it among the eight associate justices. All nine take part in the decision whether to hear the case. If four justices are in favour of taking a case, it is placed on the docket.

METHODS OF EXECUTION

Methods of inflicting the death penalty have ranged from stoning in biblical times, crucifixion under the Romans, beheading in France, to those used in the United States today: HANGING, ELECTROCUTION, GAS CHAMBER, firing squad, and LETHAL INJECTION.

Electrocution:

The electric chair was introduced in the USA in 1888, because they thought that it was more human than hanging.

The execution: after the condemned federal prisoner has been tied to the chair, copper electrodes are fixed to his head and to a leg. Powerful discharges in short intervals between 500 and 2000 volts cause the death.

Although the sentenced should be unconscious after the first discharge, sometimes this doesn't happen; often internal organs keep on working, so that more discharges are necessary.

Willie Francis: black 17-year-old boy, condemned in 1946, survived to the first attempt to kill him. An eyewitness said: 'I saw the executioner switching on and his lips swelling, his body tense and strained. I heard the electrician telling to his colleague to send in more electricity when I saw Willie Francis still alive, and the colleague said he couldn't send more electricity. Then Willie cried: 'Stop it, let me breath!' Then he said he had felt his head and his left leg burning, he had jumped against the strings and he had seen blue, pink and grey dots'. He was executed one year later, successfully.

Gas Chamber:
This execution method was introduced in the USA in the twenties, inspired by the use of poisonous gas during the World War One and of the oven as a suicide method.
The prisoner is tied to a chair in an airtight room where cyanide is released. The sentenced dies by asphyxiation after 8 - 10 minutes.

Lethal injection:

Introduced in Oklahoma and Texas in 1977; the first execution was in Texas on December 1982. It involves an intravenous continuous injection of a lethal dose of barbiturate in combination of a paralysing chemical agent. In Texas a combination of three substances is used: a barbiturate which makes the prisoner unconscious, a substance which relaxes his muscles and paralyses the diaphragm to stop the movement of the lungs and another one which makes his heart stop (surviving time 6 - 15 minutes).
                                           Some people say this is the most humane execution method.

LIMITING THE DEATH PENALTY

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United States adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This doctrine proclaimed a 'right to life' (one's protection by the forces of law) and its task was to limit the scope of the death penalty to protect juveniles, pregnant women and the elderly.

During the 1950s and 1960s international human rights treaties were developed, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the American Convention on Human Rights. These documents also provided for the right to life, but included the death penalty as an exception that must be accompanied by strict safeguards. Despite this exception, many nations throughout Western Europe stopped using capital punishment, even if they did not, technically, abolished it.

Limitations within the United States

Despite growing European abolition, the U.S. still had the death penalty, but established limitations on capital punishment.

Mental Illness and Mental Retardation

In 1986, the Supreme Court banned the execution of insane persons and required a process for determining mental competency in Ford v. Wainwright. As a result mental retardation would be a mitigating factor to be considered during sentencing.

Race

Batson v. Kentucky, (1977) the Supreme Court held that racial disparities would not be recognized as a constitutional violation of 'equal protection of the law' unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant could be shown by neutral reasons.

Juveniles:

In 1988, in Thompson v. Oklahoma, four Justices held that the execution of juvenile offenders ages fifteen and younger at the time of their crimes was unconstitutional. They defined that no state without a minimum age in its death penalty statute can go below age 16.

At present, 16 states prohibit an execution of anyone under 18 at the time of his or her crime. (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)

But generally the U.S. reserved the right to execute juvenile offenders.

Innocence:

In Herrera v. Collins (1993), the Court held that in the absence of other constitutional grounds, new evidence of innocence is no reason for federal courts to order a new trial. The Court pointed to the clemency process as a way of avoiding the execution of innocent defendants.

Since Herrera, the possibility of executing the innocent has grown. More than 80 wrongfully convicted inmates on death row have been released since 1973.

Public Support:

Today, 71% of Americans support the death penalty in theory. However, research shows that public support for the death penalty falls down to 50% when voters are offered alternative sentences. More people would support life without parole plus restitution to the victim's family than would choose the death penalty.

Women:

Women have, historically, not been subject to the death penalty at the same rates as men. The first woman has executed in the U.S., Jane Champion, who was hanged in James City, Virginia in 1632. Women have only constituted 3% of U.S. executions. In fact only three women have been executed in the post-Gregg era.

THE EU AGAINST DEATH PENALTY

On 29th June 1998, the 15 Foreign Ministers of the EU States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, Great Britain and North Ireland) were all in favour of the universal abolition of death penalty, a battle that is an important element of the EU human rights politics; to be an EU member, a State mustn't apply the death penalty. A great public opinion movement also supports this crusade.
During the EU ministers' reunion some important figures were remembered: 84% of the world executions occur in only 4 States; in 1997, 1644 death sentences were imposed in China, 143 in Iran, in 122 Saudi Arabia, 74 in the USA. And all that without defeating criminality, as death penalty supporters say.

Italy is first in this battle; in fact Italy presented the motion against death penalty to the UN commission for the human rights in Geneva.

Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, signed a decree commuting the death sentence for all of the convicts on Russia's death row, in June 1999.

OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS

Introduction

Jesus died to free us from our debts and his example is supposed to strengthen compassion and tolerance even towards enemies, poor and suffering people.

The death penalty was permitted in biblical times because its use was necessary to maintain social order. Three thousand of years ago the people formed a fragile community - without benefit or prisons and other institutions - that demanded quick, effective and harsh punishment of offenders.

The 'eye for eye' passage from the bible prescribes death as punishment for murder.

'You shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stroke for stroke.' (Exodus 21: 22-25)

Nowadays we live in a free and quiet government and we have means to build prisons strong enough to secure society from their fears of criminals.

The Death Penalty Debate

A modern society that chooses violent death as a solution to a social problem agrees officially to violence. The American government kills to show that killing is wrong. Criminals receive what they deserve if there is the mathematical certainty of the defendant's guilt, in order to show them that they have no right to take another one's life. It's perverse but in the minds of most people it is justified.

The president, the Congress of the United States, the Supreme Court of the United States, and the overwhelming majority of the American people support capital punishment. The federal government and 38 states are in favour of capital punishment, and so are the laws of other countries (for example China, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Tunisia,).

Punishment is to be inflicted according to the seriousness of the offence. The state tries to impose the death penalty fairly but despite the effort of the states and courts to devise legal formulas and procedural rules, the death penalty is arbitrary and leads to discrimination and mistakes. There are still problems with the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases so that in many cases the sentence has been subjective. The death penalty has mistakenly condemned some innocent defendants, it has been imposed unequally on the basis of race and it is arbitrary in the sense that it's imposed almost exclusively on very poor people who can hardly defend themselves.

Similar moral arguments focus on whether it is just to execute a juvenile or the mentally retarded people.

Mistaken Guilt:

Since 1972, the innocence of 76 men and 2 women was established after having been sentenced to death in the United States. Evidence of their innocence emerged in time to save their lives. Twenty-three innocent people have been mistakenly executed this century. Opponents of the death penalty think that the possibility of killing an innocent justifies the abolition of the death penalty. For the supporters of capital punishment this is not a reason to suppress it. They are convinced that America's system of capital punishment contains extraordinary safeguards to protect innocent defendants, including appeals through the state and federal courts. Before any sentence is carried out, the governor of the state will carefully examine the case to make sure that the murderer deserves a death penalty.

Inequality on the basis of race:

In general, the prosecutor has a wide discretion in deciding whether someone is supposed to receive a death sentence. If the prosecutor chooses the death penalty, a jury or judge has to go through the details of the defendant's life, including the circumstances of the murder, to determine whether the defendant shall live or die.

A number of studies have shown that black defendants were 3.9 times more likely to receive the death penalty than white defendants. More than 40% of the death condemned in USA are black, though they are only the 12% of the whole population. About the 80% of the death condemned are guilty of the murder of white people, though the number of murders of white and black people is approximately the same. Only in 1986 the Supreme Court of Justice established that attorneys couldn't exclude a potential juryman only on race ground.

America's shame - killing kids:

Also, in USA and in a few other States one who was minor when he committed the crime (during the last years Nigeria, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Rwanda, Bangladesh, Barbados, Saudi Arabia) can be sentenced to death. In some trials, the young age isn't discussed at all. Eight minors condemned out of nine are black or Hispanic; the majority comes from very degraded ambiences, has suffered physical and sexual violence, and has mental diseases.

Executing mentally incompetent people:

Many people with delays or mental diseases are in death row. Amnesty International documented the cases of more than 50 prisoners with big mental problems executed from 1982, opposing the resolution 1989/64 of the UN Economic and Social Council which recommended the elimination of death penalty for those people who have mental diseases or very limited mental capability.
In some States the level of mental capability under which a person can't be executed is really low, and only nine States forbid death penalty for people with mental disease.

Thesis in favour of the death penalty

Criminal justice systems impose punishments for three reasons: Just punishment, deterrence, and incapacitation.

• A punishment is just if it reflects the seriousness of the crime. Supporters claim that without a death penalty there would be no difference between a  bloody murder and other offences for instance sexual offences and serious drug trafficking which are punished with some sort of sentences or life prison terms. It's absolutely no revenge, it's just punishment in the name of justice.

The death penalty is also justified because of its deterring effect that saves the lives of innocent persons by discouraging potential murderers.

• They think that capital punishment prevents murderers from killing again. Their argument against a life imprisonment without parole (the early prison release of an offender) is that it leaves prison guards and other prisoners at risk. A prisoner serving a life term may also escape from prison or obtain parole or executive clemency. Only a capital sentence can free the society of their fears of serious murderers.

Arguments of the opponents

The state gives back wrong with wrong to show how much they care about innocent life. But who is then to blame when innocent people have been sentenced to death? It's a shame for the American government to kill a person in the name of democracy and justice. No man has the right to take another one's life because 'Every person is entitled to life, to freedom and to his own safety'. (Universal declaration of human rights of 10th December 1948)

There is absolutely no evidence that the death penalty deters murder and discourages murderers any better than a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. In the U.S. the murder rate is no higher in states that do not have the death penalty than in those that do.

An execution of a prisoner costs more than life imprisonment. That's because capital trials require more expert witness and more investigators, a longer jury-selection process, the expenses of sequestering a jury, not one but two trials because of the required separate sentencing trial, and appeals in state and federal courts. Finally, let's not forget the cost of security on death rows, the clemency hearings and the cost of the execution itself.

The psychological Viewpoint

It's obvious that the American criminal justice system is less than perfect and therefore it's unreasonable to expect justice when the system fails in so many points.

In my opinion it's not necessary to kill a murderer to protect society against him and to prevent him from repeating the crime. Society can defend itself by other means than by destroying life. For instance by building prisons strong enough to secure themselves forever against convicts and to make an escape impossible.

The state can't just give back wrong with wrong, as some sort of revenge, we also must look into a person's mind. A person who suffers from mental retardation typically has a below average intellect and lacks the kind of adaptive behaviour which normally develops during childhood.

I think and many psychologists agree that our actions depend on the childhood and education - how our parents treated us and what sort of moral codes they were taught. A suffering from physical or sexual violence in childhood can influence some person's character and conduct in later life. I can't believe that humans are evil by nature. Those who have committed a murder or other offences are the victims themselves. Humanity means to forgive and to take care about the fellow being. Retarded, poor, black or white people - we are all human beings and we deserve the chance to make things better.

I think the most human way for the offender would be some sort of rehabilitation with psychological support, a possibility to re-educate humanely and morally. But the state would say that such an institution will cost too much and the money is needed for other community projects such as schools, hospitals, public safety and jobs.

I can understand this statement but what is really to be said against a life imprisonment without the possibility of parole instead of a death sentence?

There are two points in favour: On the one hand a life imprisonment is cheaper than a death penalty and on the other hand it's an effective punishment because it's hard for prisoners to overcome the hardships and limitations in prison.

I'd agree that it's just to punish a criminal but it's inhuman to put him to death. Neither the state, nor the jury or single individuals have the right to interfere in human lives and to decide on their death.

'Allowing our government to kill citizens compromises the deepest moral values upon which this country was conceived: the inviolable dignity of human persons'. (Sister Helen Prejean)

I think that supporters of executions don't know the truth of what is going on. The secrecy surrounding executions makes it possible for executions to continue. I'm convinced that if execution were made public, the violence would be unmasked, and the Americans would abolish executions in shame.

DEAD MAN WALKING

Biographical information about the author

'Dead Man Walking' is written by Sister Helen Prejean who fights against capital punishment in the U.S.A. She was born in Baton Rouge in the 1940s and has lived and worked in Louisiana all her life. As an abolitionist of death penalty, she published lectures about her experiences working with death-row inmates. She is a member of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Medaille, an order that she joined in 1957.

Helen Prejean had a happy childhood. When she was young she saw the world without any violence and racism- without differences between black and white people.

But one day she saw physical violence against a black person and felt awful. Eventually she noticed various problems, - drugs, violence and so on- in her society. Even friends of hers- 'coloured' friends were treated badly. So she decided to help the poor and to improve their treatment.

The Plot and Viewpoints

She started to work as a nun, not a social worker, at a place called Hope House in St. Thomas in 1981. One day while she was doing her job, her friend asked her to become a pen-pal to a prisoner on death-row named Elmo Patrick Sonnier, who with his brother Eddie had shot Loretta Bourque and David LeBlanque.

The man scares her but in spite of that she feels some sort of compassion and decides to write him without knowing how much it will change her life. They soon become steady correspondents and Helen begins to think as a fellow human being. It seems to me that she even forgets his crime for a moment by reading his thoughtful letters. She visits him at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola.

I think nobody can imagine what human beings go through when they are sentenced to death. What feelings of helplessness must they have knowing that they are going to die. What pain, sorrow and rage must they feel waiting for the poison to flow through their veins.

There are questions like:'Maybe violence is natural to him? Maybe he is desperate and needs help?' Helen says:'The problem is, we have images of death-row inmates -wild-eyed-people who have killed once and will kill again.'

But when Sister Prejean meets Pat the first time she is surprised how human, even likable, he is. Eventually she becomes his spiritual adviser and finally a close friend.

But she doesn't forget the fact that Pat has committed a terrible crime for what the parents of the victims want to see him pay. They want to get peace with the death of their children's murderer.

Still Sister Helen feels compassion with the victim's parents and understands their rage. She believes that executions are murder, worse than murder because they are committed in the name of 'civilized' society.

Page 77/78: 'The people want Patrick Sonnier to be dead. But then who is going to kill them for killing him?"

Eventually Sister Helen is convinced she is doing the right thing. At the Death House where the electric chair is located she stays with Pat during his final days and supports him by showing love and reading from the Bible right up to his execution. She decides to be with Pat every minute that she can. Prejean´s duty is to help Patrick die.

The last days are described in such a depressive way in the book that I almost started to cry. Patrick and Sister Helen talk about life that seems so short, about God and love. All she has to do is listen.

Page 105: Patrick: '´I have never known real love,' he says, 'never loved women or anybody all that well myself. I gave Mama a lot of trouble and Eddie was always her baby and it's not that I blame her. It's a shame a man has to come to prison to find love.' He looks up at me and says, 'Thanks for loving me.'

Helen Prejean is a strong woman who bears evil with God on her side. She wishes to have the power for giving encouragement to Patrick and to the parents of the young victims.

In the opinion of most people first-degree-murderers should pay with their life; for example the chaplain of the prison claims that these people are the 'scum of the earth'; - isn't that intolerant and childish? They are the same that say 'We should avoid violence as far as possible'. What are Jesus´ messages about? Jesus, whose way of life we all should follow, refused to meet hate with hate and violence with violence. Everybody should pray for the strength to be a bit like him.

Walking to the electric chair, Patrick asks the Warden if Sister Helen was allowed to touch his arm. Then she walks behind him, reading from the Bible.

Only, after Pat's execution it becomes clear that Pat helped Eddie raping the teenagers but only Eddie killed them.

Nevertheless, that means that an innocent man died because of his love for his brother and of course because of the state that didn't notice the mistake. For Prejean it's obvious: 'Patrick Sonnier died as a hero.'

While I was reading 'Dead Man Walking' I felt as if Sister Helen Prejean was taking me along walking down death row.

In my point of view the death penalty isn't human. I can understand that people suffer terribly when a person, a murderer, kills their children. The murderer has committed a crime and he has to be punished for what he did and some people say, it's justice to kill that person the same way he or she has killed the victims, but I ask myself   'What about forgiveness?'

Isn't it enough to lock someone up in prison all his life?

I'm not in the situation of someone who has lost his child. Perhaps I would also like to see the murderer die - of course I would.

A friend of Prejean: 'it satisfies a deeply felt moral intuition that there are some crimes for which death is the only proportionate punishment, and this murder certainly seems to be one of those crimes. That is what the American people feel'

After Patrick's execution Helen Prejean becomes the spiritual adviser of her second death-row inmate Robert Willie whom she also watches die.

Prejean´s successful story was turned into a Hollywood Film with Jean Penn and Susan Sarandon with the same title as Helen's book 'Dead Man Walking'.

BIRDMAN OF ALCATRAZ

Biographical information about the author

The American author Thomas E. Gaddis was born on September 14, 1908 in Denver and died of cancer on October 10, 1984 in Portland.

He was educated at the University of Minnesota in 1932. In his later life he worked as an educator in the field of correction, as a psychologist and author. He was co-director of the department of education, member of faculty and professor in Oregon State System of Higher Education and at the University of Portland. Gaddis is best known as the author of 'Birdman of Alcatraz', a book that tells the story of a prisoner named Robert F. Stroud. In 1962 it was turned into a film hit. He is also the co-author of  'Killer', which is a Journal of Murder. Gaddis taught criminology and psychology in Oregon and was founding director of the National Newgate Prison Projects (Prison in England).

"Thomas E. Gaddis did not meet Robert F. Stroud, did not have access to him, until they finally met briefly in a courtroom in Kansas City in 1962, with only time to shake hands."

The Plot

Robert F. Stroud was born as the son of Ben and Elizabeth Stroud in 1890, Alaska. When he was a child his father abused him. As a result he was never like other children. While Robert was known as a secluded, lonely child, his brother, Marcus, grew up as a happy outgoing boy. One day Ben left his wife on account of an affair with a woman and since then Robert took care of the family.

On January 18, 1909, Stroud was sentenced to twelve years for the murder of Charlie Dahmer who had abused his girlfriend. While serving his prison sentence at the U.S. Penitentiary McNeil Island, Washington, he viciously attacked another inmate. This caused the transfer to the U.S. Penitentiary Leavenworth, Kansas, the most overcrowded prison in the country, housing 3000 convicts in a plant whose capacity was 1640. In 1916, he murdered a guard, was convicted of first-degree murder and received a death sentence. The date of the execution was to be in April 1920.

His mother Elizabeth pleaded for his life by telling President Woodrow Wilson that Robert's father was responsible for his tragic life and that Robert was now going to pay the penalty for his father's conduct. In 1920, President Woodrow Wilson changed the verdict from death penalty to life imprisonment.

At the U.S. Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Robert Stroud developed his interest in birds. He made studies of canaries, observed their habits and was able to heal their illness. Eventually he wrote two books about canaries and their diseases. He got known by his correspondence with bird lovers from all over the world and even newspapers and television were aware of a strange "bird doctor" in the Leavenworth penitentiary.

Although there existed no rules pro or con his birds activities, prison officials disliked Stroud's behaviour. As a result Stroud was forced to be transferred to Alcatraz in 1942, where he spent the next 17 years. After having lost access to the birds, Stroud studied some law books and found out some interesting facts about the prison reforms.

In 1959, he was transferred to the Medical Centre for Federal prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, where he died in 1963.

They have made a film of the book and Burt Lancaster is the central figure.

My own Viewpoint

The book offers a look at Robert Stroud's life before, during and after his time at Alcatraz.

In general I like to read books that have a lot of psychological material in it. Things like how people feel, why they react in a special way or what they were going through in their lifetime play an important factor for me. On the one hand the book gives you much information about birds and on the other hand it shows you how a convict changes his view of life in isolation. To the world outside the prison Robert F. Stroud is not more than a first-degree murderer but if you look into this person like I did you will also recognize his good sides. For my part I really learned a lot by reading this fascinating book.

Human beings are said to be evil by nature up to some point. Education however, is responsible for the way we deal with people or handle a situation.

Is Robert F. Stroud insane? Or is he violent?

In my point of view his parents failed in every respect. Robert's father beat him up whenever he was drunk and his mother kept the young boy away from other children. He was known as a loner and strange child and he was unable to show his feelings. After the separation of Ben and Elizabeth, Robert had to bear the responsibility for his mother and his brother Marcus. I think it was a difficult task for Robert although he never complained about it. But one day his bitterness broke out when he committed a murder.

Stroud entered prison for murder at the age of 19 and died 54 years later, still in prison. He wasn't just isolated from the rest of the prison building but separated from the whole world. He had the reputation of being legally dead, hated, feared, isolated and without any privileges. What fascinated me most was that he had the strength to keep himself alive by creating a world of his own in a tiny, dim Leavenworth cell.

His "bird career" started one day as he found some birds that landed outside his cell window. Day by day he developed a love of canaries. He built cages, observed their habits and finally wrote two books on bird diseases. He treated his birds as if they were his little sons. He found something that was worth living for. With the bird's help he was able to overcome the hardships and limitations of years in prison.

Quote P.111:

"He made a schedule and within the bounds of his tiny empire, he rose, washed, ate, worked, exercised, rested, studied, read and slept like a citizen of the world outside. Since he was excluded from people, his people were his birds. Birds were his family, wife, children and afternoon matinee."

Not only bird lovers but also newspapers, several canary journals, television and organisations became aware of Stroud's bird activities. His popularity spread over the world and his canaries helped him to live a life as normal as possible. So the fascination of this book is not the justice or injustice of the fact that Robert spent his life in prison but the story of how he kept alive.

The next point that interested me was the relationship between Robert and his mother Elizabeth. She was the one who saved him from his execution after having committed a murder of a Leavenworth guard.

Quote P.65:

"I am his mother and am responsible for his being and am to blame for his father he had."

She brought him the birds and medicine he needed for his studies and was always there for her little darling. Maybe she felt guilty due to his tragic childhood.

But I think that Robert would have rather avoided her because he wanted to decide on his own about his life. She protected him all his lifetime but she made mistakes that had a negative influence on Robert. He never could adapt to society because he was kept away and he never learned to show any feelings. Being isolated from the rest of the world was maybe his chance to get his life under control and to free himself from his mother, the past and all that. He was not only a murderer that served time but he truly believed that the prison was serving him time.

The prisoner's time at Alcatraz

In 1942, Robert Stroud was transferred to the island of Alcatraz and had to leave his birds. Stroud was probably the island's most famous prisoner, the so-called "Birdman of Alcatraz". In reality, he never had any birds at Alcatraz. He then developed his interest in law and prison reforms. He studied all available books on sociology and penology from the library of Alcatraz.

He became the witness of the so-called "Battle of Alcatraz" that took place on May 2-4, 1946.

Six prisoners were able to overpower cell house officers and gain access to weapons and cell house keys - in order to take control of the cell house. Their plan began to fall apart when the inmates found they did not have the key to unlock the recreation yard door. After some time, prison officials discovered the escape attempt. Instead of giving up, Bernard Coy, Joe Cretzer, Marvin Hubbard, Sam Shockley, Miran Thompson, and Clarence Carnes decided to fight it out. Eventually Shockley, Thompson, and Carnes returned to their cells, but not before the officers taken hostage were shot by Cretzer. One officer, William Miller, died from his injuries. A second officer, Harold Stites was shot and killed attempting to take control of the cell house. About 18 officers were injured during the escape attempt. The U.S. Marines were eventually called out to help, and on May 4, the escape attempt ended with the discovery of the bodies of Coy, Cretzer, and Hubbard. Shockley, Thompson, and Carnes stood trial for the death of the officers; Shockley and Thompson received the death penalty and were executed in the gas chamber at San Quentin in December 1948. Carnes, age 19, received a second life sentence.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF ALCATRAZ

Before the Prison

The name Alcatraz is derived from the Spanish 'Alcatraces.' In 1775, the Spanish explorer Juan Manuel de Ayala was the first to sail into what is now known as San Francisco Bay - he named one of the three islands Alcatraces; over time, the name was Alcatraz. While the exact meaning is still discussed, Alcatraz is usually defined as meaning 'pelican' or 'strange bird.'

In 1850, the island was used for a United States military reservation. The California Gold Rush, the resulting boom in the growth of San Francisco, and the need to protect San Francisco Bay led the U.S. Army to build a Citadel, or fortress, at the top of the island in the early 1850's. The Army also made plans to install more than 100 cannons on the island, making Alcatraz the most heavily fortified military site on the West Coast. Together with Fort Point and Lime Point, Alcatraz formed a 'triangle of defence' designed to protect the entrance to the bay.

By the late 1850's, the first military prisoners were being housed on the island. The defensive necessity of Alcatraz became unimportant (the island never fired its guns in battle) and in 1909, the Army tore down the Citadel, leaving it as the basis for the foundation of a new military prison. From 1909 through 1911, the military prisoners on Alcatraz built the new prison, which became a federal prison in 1933. The prison was considered escape-proof because of its fortress like structure and the strong, cold currents in the surrounding waters.

It was this prison building that later became famous as 'The Rock.'

'The Rock'

The U.S. Army used the island for more than 80 years--from 1850 until 1933, when the island was transferred to the U.S. Department of Justice for use by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The Federal Government had decided to open a maximum-security, minimum-privilege penitentiary to deal with the most incorrigible inmates in Federal prisons, and to show the public that the Federal Government was serious about stopping crime of the 1920's and 1930's. But USP Alcatraz was not the 'America's Devil's Island' that many books and movies describe. The average population was only about 260-275. Many prisoners actually claimed the living conditions (for instance, always one man to a cell) at Alcatraz to be better than in other Federal prisons, and several inmates actually wanted to be transferred to Alcatraz.

Prison Life

While several well-known criminals, such as Al Capone (mafia boss of Chicago), George 'Machine-Gun' Kelly, Alvin Karpis and Arthur 'Doc' Barker did time on Alcatraz, most of the 1,576 prisoners there were not well-known gangsters, but prisoners who refused to conform to the rules and regulations at other Federal institutions, who were considered violent and dangerous, or who were considered escape risks. If a man did not behave well at another institution, he could be sent to Alcatraz, where every inmate was taught to follow rules and regulations. At Alcatraz, a prisoner had four rights: food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. Everything else was a privilege that had to be earned. Some privileges that a prisoner could earn included working, corresponding with and having visits from family members, access to the prison library, and activities such as painting and music. If prison officials claimed that a man was able to follow the rules, he could then be transferred back to another Federal prison to finish his sentence and be released.

Escape Attempts

Over the 29 years (1934-1963) that the Federal prison operated, 36 men (including two who tried to escape twice) were involved in 14 separate escape attempts. Twenty-three were caught, six were shot and killed during their escape, and two drowned. Two of the men who were caught were later executed in the gas chamber at the California State Prison at San Quentin for their role in the death of an officer during the famous May 2-4, 1946, 'Battle of Alcatraz' escape attempt.

Whether or not anyone succeeded in escaping from Alcatraz depends on the definition of 'successful escape.' Is it getting out of the cell house, reaching the water, making it to the land, or reaching land and not getting caught? Officially, no one ever succeeded in escaping from Alcatraz, although to this day there are five prisoners listed as 'missing'.

Alcatraz Closes

On March 21, 1963, USP Alcatraz closed because the institution was too expensive. An estimated $3-5 million was needed just for restoration to keep the prison open. That did not include daily operating costs - Alcatraz was nearly three times more expensive to operate than any other Federal prison. The major expense was caused by the physical isolation of the island - the exact reason islands have been used as prisons throughout history. This isolation meant that everything (food, supplies, water, fuel) had to be brought to Alcatraz by boat. The Federal Government found that it was more cost-effective to build a new institution than to keep Alcatraz open.

After the prison closed many ideas were proposed for the island, including a monument to the United Nations, a West Coast version of the Statue of Liberty, and a shopping centre/hotel complex. In 1969, the island again made news when a group of Native American Indians claimed Alcatraz as Indian land with the hope of creating a Native American cultural centre and education complex on the island. Initially, public support for the Native Americans' cause was strong, and thousands of people (general public, schoolchildren, celebrities, hippies, Vietnam war protesters, Hells Angels) came to the island over the next 18 months. Unfortunately, the small Native American leadership group could not control the situation and much was destroyed (graffiti, vandalism, and a fire that destroyed the lighthouse keeper's home, the Warden's home, and the Officer's Club). In June 1971, Federal Marshals removed the remaining Native Americans from the island.

In 1973 the island was opened to the public as a part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. It has become one of the most popular Park Service sites - more than one million visitors from around the world visit the island each year.

    REFERENCES

• Gaddis, Thomas E. / Birdman of Alcatraz / Comstock Editions / 1989
• Prejean, Helen / Dead Man Walking / Harper Collins Paperback / 1996
• Winters, Paul A. / The death penalty: Opposing Viewpoints / Greenhaven Press / 1997

• Death Penalty Information Centre

https://www.essential.org/dpic/

• Encarta Encyclopaedia Home Page (MSN)

https://encarta.msn.com/

</DIV><DIV ALIGN=LEFT></DIV><DIV ALIGN=CENTER></DIV><DIV ALIGN=LEFT>
</DIV><DIV ALIGN=LEFT>
</DIV><DIV ALIGN=CENTER>