A Question of Execution

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Email This Page

Author Message   Tonya AALBC .com Platinum Poster Username: Tonya Post Number: 4332 Registered: 07-2006 Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 01:12 am:        Once Again, a Question of Execution, but in a Dual Killing Much Overlooked Relatives shield Barbara McGriff, center, outside federal court in Brooklyn after her son, Kenneth McGriff, was found guilty Thursday. By CLYDE HABERMAN Published: February 2, 2007 Some death penalty cases are less equal than others. Take the capital murder trial of a man known to his admirers as ’Preme, short for Supreme. His real name is Kenneth McGriff. He is a New York drug trafficker of considerable notoriety. A few weeks ago, he went on trial in federal court in Brooklyn, charged with a shopping list of offenses that included racketeering and murder for hire. Mr. McGriff paid $50,000 to have two men killed, the government said. And so, it said, he deserves to die by lethal injection. One of the two dead men was a performer of little fame who went by the nom de rap of E Money Bags. Mr. Money Bags, whose real name was Eric Smith, had committed the indiscretion of killing a friend of Mr. McGriff’s. The other victim ascribed to Mr. McGriff was one Troy Singleton, described as a drug dealer himself and someone who Mr. McGriff feared might retaliate for the Smith murder. This was not a crowd steeped in biblical verses about turning the other cheek. Death penalty cases do not unfold every day here. Yet for weeks the McGriff trial flew under the city’s radar, almost unnoticed. New Yorkers were more engrossed in another capital murder case reaching its final phase in the same courthouse, in a room six floors below. There, on Tuesday, a jury sentenced a street thug named Ronell Wilson to die for the icy-blooded murder of two undercover police detectives in 2003. After the fact, some experts called the Wilson verdict all but inevitable, given the nature of the case: two dead officers and a defendant who, whatever deprivations he had endured as a boy, seemed unrepentant. Still, the verdict came as a shock for many. After all, capital punishment has long been an abstract concept in New York. No defendant in a federal case has been executed in this state since 1954. Soon enough, New Yorkers will find out if the Wilson trial was an exception or the start of a trend. Mr. McGriff will be the first test. Yesterday, a jury found him guilty of the two murders. They saw a stone killer, never mind his professorial appearance as he stood before them in glasses, sweater vest and tie. On Tuesday, the same jurors will hear arguments, pro and con, on whether Mr. McGriff should pay the supreme price for his crimes. Some doubt it. Mr. McGriff did not seem unduly worried, judging from his smile to supporters after the verdict. His lead lawyer, David A. Ruhnke, expressed confidence that the jury would spare his client’s life. Even the mother of one of Mr. McGriff’s victims told reporters later that she thought that death was “not the answer.” The judge, Frederic Block, has also weighed in against an execution. Last week, with the jury out of the room, he told lawyers in the case that there was “no chance in the world” of a death sentence. It was “absurd” for the government to seek it, he said, and he urged the Justice Department to reconsider. Judge Block’s statements, while startling, were not supposed to be made public. But he had neglected to order that his remarks be sealed until after the trial — a mistake, he later acknowledged. Once reporters read a transcript, his views made their inevitable way into print. Whether the jury agrees with his assessment remains, of course, to be seen. Nonetheless, in his bluntness the judge touched a core element of capital punishment, one that gives its opponents a sense that its application is at best inconstant. The death penalty is arguably not so much about the killers as it is about their victims. Whom they murder often counts more than the fact that they murder. It is still not clear, for example, if Ronell Wilson, 24, knew that his victims were police officers. So it is not unreasonable to speculate about whether the jurors would have imposed a death sentence had he shot not undercover detectives, but rather a couple of thugs in search of guns, men much like himself. Three weeks ago, in the same courthouse, a jury spared the life of a drug-dealing gang member whom they had convicted of a cocaine-related murder. Now we have Mr. McGriff, 46, guilty of killing two men who moved in his drug- and violence-filled orbit. Will the jury vote to take his life? At one point yesterday before the verdict, Mr. McGriff raised his right hand and flashed a V sign to his friends in the courtroom. He did not look like someone who thought he would die anytime soon. Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company   Urban_scribe AALBC .com Platinum Poster Username: Urban_scribe Post Number: 360 Registered: 05-2006 Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 03:15 pm:        I've always been torn on the issue of capital punishment. On one hand, if somebody killed someone I love, I'd want them to fry for it. On the other, considering our imperfect, racist justice system, what if they execute the wrong person? It's one thing to spend 20, 30 years rotting away in prison for a crime you didn't commit. Then new evidence proves you were innocent all along - you're released and financially compensated. You could never get back those years, but at least you can go on with your life. But if they later learn they've executed the wrong person, there's no restitution for that. In cases where capital punishment applies, I would instead sentence them to 100 years in prison without the possibility of parole. That way, in the remote possibility that they're innocent, there's an opportunity to rectify the conviction. Also, I strongly disagree with the law in most states: If you kill a cop you automatically face the death penalty if convicted. A cop's life, imo, is no more valuable than that of your average citizen. In fact, imo, I'd say it was less valuable. After all, no one forced them to become cops. They made a choice, they knew the risks involved, and that's that. Seeking the death penalty just because the victims happen to be police officers is BS.   Cynique "Cyniquian" Level Poster Username: Cynique Post Number: 7124 Registered: 01-2004 Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 03:46 pm:        I have no love for cops either but they are a symbol of law and order in a civilized society and as such are apparently considered sacrosanct. I also have mixed feelings about the death penality. I think families of victims need closure but some report that the death of a perpetrator who took a loved one's life didn't really bring this. Forgivenance can bring spiritual closure, and a life sentence without possibility of parole keeps The State from stooping to the level of a common criminal... I guess.   Chrishayden AALBC .com Platinum Poster Username: Chrishayden Post Number: 3567 Registered: 03-2004 Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 11:48 am:        Supreme is going to get about as much sympathy as Tookie. I tell you, if I was arguing against the death penalty, I would not use one of the guys who was responsible for flooding Queens with crack in the 80's.