Mercy

What can be forgiven? What should be? These are questions that can come to mind when it comes to everything from a partner’s indiscretions to something trivial like a ripped sweater. You would think that even using those two examples you could easily say what is the correct answer, yet there have been couples who stayed together happily even knowing about a one night stand and friendships tattered worse than the sweater.

The question comes up because of the news stories concerning Susan Atkins. Atkins, in case you are unfamiliar with the name, is one of the members of the famed Mason family who gruesomely ended the lives of nine people, including actress Sharon Tate and her unborn child. Atkins was originally sentenced to death, but it was changed to life in prison when the US Supreme Court overturned the death penalty. Atkins was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer, and is currently paralyzed over 85% of her body. She has but a short while left before she dies. In 2008, she requested a compassionate release from prison which was denied. Her next parole hearing is in September of this year, if she makes it that long.

There are valid arguments on both sides of this coin. Granting mercy to a woman who showed no mercy both undermines the justice system and makes mankind more compassionate than the monsters that sometimes come from it. How do you explain to Sharon Tate’s sister, who has been at every parole hearing for Atkins, that despite being denied parole 17 other times, now that she has a tumor it is like a get out of jail free card? How do you explain to the countless prisoners who have tried very hard to take advantage of prison programs and truly showed compassion and remorse that no matter what you do, you cannot be rehabilitated in the eyes of the state and you may as well not bother?

Atkins if anything has truly shown that our prison system can help people who have committed horrendous crimes. She was sentenced to death on March 29, 1971, and within 3 years she had turned to religion to help cleanse her soul. She has been a model prisoner, having worked in several programs in the prison. She received commendation for her role in saving the lives of two fellow inmates. She also has worked towards discouraging teenagers from idolizing Manson. She knows he was a monster, and she knows that much of the influence he had over her brought out her own demons. Yet, despite her best efforts to be a reformed criminal, she finds that every time she is up for parole, she is denied. You can make the argument that she should just be happy that she recognized the agony she has put so many people through. She shouldn’t be trying to get out of prison when she belongs there for the people she killed. But isn’t that why we offer parole? Do allow for people to know that yes, you will pay for your crime, yes, you have done bad, but we still believe in humanity and we still believe that there is good in everyone and we are hoping that yours will float to the surface to wash away the side we put in jail in the first place?

The question I have is, why would we dangle freedom in front of this woman so many times? 17 different parole hearings? It is cruel when it can be assumed that every member of that parole board made up their mind about Susan Atkins long before they sat down and read her file. They have seen the pictures, they have read the stories, they know the image of a swastika carved into Manson’s head. They hear this woman giggling at her own trial some 40 years ago, not realizing the gravity of not just what she is facing, but what she has done. Take into consideration, also, the members of the families torn apart because of those murders. 17 times they had to wonder if they would have to witness the release of the person who killed their sister, their daughter or their son. Doesn’t it make more sense for us as a people to be more concise with our punishment system? Right now, we are doling out torture towards many parties. Have we taunted the prisoner? Check. Have we picked the scab off the wound of the families? Check. Have we caused the public to once again be reminded of the bloody scene and made them question not only their beliefs, but also to wonder if our tax dollars have been improperly used in the cost of every parole hearing, every hospital visit to keep a death row inmate healthy, and every moment we spend on something that happened so long ago? I would say we got a perfect score on this.

Although she was sentenced to death, it is hard to say if she ever would have faced death at the hands of the state. The length of time an inmate stays on “death row’ is so lengthy, it has been shown that nearly a quarter of deaths on death row are actually from natural causes. As of 2008, 3263 prisoners are awaiting execution. The longest serving prisoner on death row, who was only recently executed, served 33 years. 33 years! This man had to sit around and essentially wait to die. I am not suggesting that any crime he may have committed didn’t warrant 33 years of prison. What I do suggest is that if the sentence was death, shouldn’t we get on with it already? Don’t keep him around like a dog in a cage, pacing back and forth, possibly fueling his own mental demons that got him there in the first place, only to kill him 33 years later. At this point, is it any wonder that sympathies start to bubble up for these prisoners? Are the victims of the crimes committed even remembered by anyone outside of their family and friends? In a high profile murder like the Mason crimes, we remember Sharon because of who she was, who she was married to and her husband. Yet I would imagine people would be hard pressed to come up with the other people in the house that night. Yet we all know who killed them. Wouldn’t it have been possibly better to kill off the killer right away so that we can get that nasty taste in our mouth out? Let’s instead honor the dead instead of thinking of the bad guy?

Mind you, I am not for this solution, either. I feel our legal system is flawed and even though the percentage of wrongly convicted felons is probably super low, isn’t even 1% something we need to be concerned about? I also question our own society. How many times have parents been called down to their son’s school because he had hit another child? Yet we cheer at boxing matches. How many times do we tell our children that killing is wrong, yet you will read the newspaper headlines showing everything from war to executions, all sanctioned killings. We can rationalize each of these things. War is needed to keep people safe by getting rid of evil. Capital punishment is crucial in a deterrent to keep people from acting out on primitive actions and we can say “an eye for an eye” without really considering what eyes are involved.

I would like to think as a society we are better than all of that. We have let women vote, and elected a black president. We have come together over tragedy like 9/11 and Katrina. We have seen the good in some of the most horrid places, and witnessed evil in paradise. Shouldn’t we then see that in order to continue to evolve as a people, as a species, perhaps a little bit of compassion, a little bit of mercy might in fact help us to gain another level of existence?

Susan Atkins is going to die. There is no question. Whether it be today, tomorrow or in 20 years, it is going to happen. Of course, it also may not make much difference in the grand scheme of things to keep her in her prison hospital bed, unable to move, and knowing that she did horrible things in her life. It may not make much difference to release her to her own home where her husband will be left to care for a killer because he loves her that much. But every small action has an impact, and I would like to think that a simple act of mercy truly does go a long way.