What is more cruel and unusual punishment: Keep a man on Death Row for 25 years or an alleged few minutes of pain when the needle finally goes in?
“I have a sense of urgency when I work, a drive that’s inside me. Because I don’t know how much time I have,”
That’s William Noguera speaking, who’s been on Death Row at San Quentin State Prison since 1988, after being convicted of murdering his girlfriend’s mother in 1983, when he was 18. During that time he’s become an artist and his drawings are now making between $5,000 and $12,000.
His lawyers are still appealing his conviction. They are not saying he didn’t kill his girlfriend’s mother but Noguera denies he did it for the reason stated by the prosecution, which was that he did it for money. He claims that the woman forced her daughter to have an abortion and that, when he heard about it, he ‘lost it’ and killed her in rage – him being a devout Catholic and all.
It would be vaguely ironic if he was telling the truth: to have someone who is so pro-life that he killed the person he held responsible for having an abortion performed on her daughter – and then for the state to order the death of this anti-abortionist… It is a bit of an unholy mess, to put it mildly.
If his version of the story is true, of course. For all I know he did kill the woman for her money, as the prosecution claimed. It’s one of Hollywood’s favourite themes: the innocent man who’s on Death Row – and I’m quite sure that there are a number of people in that position who wouldn’t be there if all people truly were equal under the law. Nevertheless, it’s probably safe to say that most people who are in prison did, in fact, commit the crimes they were convicted for. (That some things shouldn’t be punishable by law to this extent is another matter, of course.) So, while it’s always tempting to take the side of one man who is set against the system, that may not always be correct.
Anyway, there is something very wrong with a system that makes it possible that a man has to wait a quarter of a century (and counting) after being sentenced to death, before the actual execution takes place. Certainly, the death penalty is such a grave and, of course, irrevocable punishment, that one needs to give the defendant time enough to appeal against it but 25 years is more than pushing it.
Only recently, there was all that hoopla about those lethal injections which might not be as painless as was previously thought. Obviously, it is a good thing that these things are investigated when doubts of this kind are raised: it is one thing for the state to claim the right to kill its citizens, it’s quite another to do so in a shoddy and/or brutal way. The law itself states that a sentence may never be ‘cruel and unusual’.
Which is nice: there is no need to make this whole ugly process any more painful but I would argue that to keep someone waiting on Death Row for a quarter of a century and longer is way more ‘cruel and unusual’ than the alleged few minutes of pain when that damned needle finally will be applied.
(Both pictures from the William Noguera gallery)
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe today to get free updates by email or RSS.
March 11th, 2009 at 00:37
court docs/testimony from many witnesses who knew the victim state under oath that the victim was actively trying to hire a hitman to have william noguera killed. it was not a simple fact that william did not believe in abortion. william and his girlfriend were deeply in-love and wanted to keep their baby. the victim ranted about killing william’s baby. it’s a mean situation that finally came to a horrible end. in order to seek the death penalty, prosecutors had to tie in a life insurance policy. it was a sad and tragic time for everyone. not as cut and dry as you write it. everyone lost out on this one. everyone.
March 11th, 2009 at 01:02
Thanks for visiting and commenting – though I have to say I’m baffled and more than a bit exasperated by your “not as cut and dry as you write it” remark.
In both the alineas that I comment directly on the news story I’ve built in “ifs” and “buts” precisely because I don’t know enough about this particular case.
I’ve been writing these blog posts for more than two years now but it never ceases to amaze me how people simply don’t read what I actually write (or “read” things I never wrote.)
J.
March 11th, 2009 at 01:36
you’re welcome j. it seems cut and dry; that is how i perceive what i read that you actually wrote. picture in your mind, if you will, 2 slow moving trains bound for each other…unstoppable, inevitable, preventable? so many conflictions with regard to killing; whether it’s an abortion, a murder, or captial punishment? what if it were the other way around? what if the murderer had died and the victim had lived based on the arrangement of murder for hire? i wonder if your blogs of 2 years would be the same? it’s all speculation and opinion i guess? take care and best regards. YM
March 11th, 2009 at 02:03
Thanks for coming back to this. I’m not sure I follow your line of argument.
My column:
- First two paragraphs: I recap the story as told in the newspaper
- Second two paragraphs: I admit that I don’t know enough to judge
- Rest of column: I comment on some aspects of the death penalty in general.
For the rest, yes, for every road taken, every specific outcome, there could have been many other roads and many other outcomes. That is, obviously, a given. I have no quarrel with that but it was not what I was talking about here,
J.
March 11th, 2009 at 02:15
no line of argument. the newspaper doesnt mention what’s in court docs/testimony. i’m adding to what you dont know and what’s not mentioned in the recap story. again, best regards. ym
April 17th, 2009 at 19:57
I knew Billy Noguera. We are the same age and he transfered into my high school in our Junior year, where we had a few classes together. He lived down the street from friends of mine, including one who was hired impromptu one night to help steal Billy’s car. My girlfriend at the time was also a close friend to Billy’s sister.
My impression of Billy was always that he was basically a violent asshole. He was a drug addict and a rumored drug dealer. He disrupted classes for no apparent reason and stormed out of class on several occasions. He was in at least one scuffle with a teacher, I saw him deliberately knock a two foot stack of papers off of the teacher’s desk, and he got into a slugging match with another student directly over my desk. This was all roughly a year before he committed murder. Billy didn’t care about anyone but Billy.
Everything I’ve ever heard, including reports attributed to his family, were that he did it for insurance money. I have never heard this abortion twist until reading this blog. And knowing him as I do, I can not imagine Billy being distraught over an aborted child unless it somehow caused him loss of income.
The ‘devout Catholic’ description of Billy is like calling Hitler an Orthodox Jew. His sister, who lived in the same house, was a Mormon convert, which would seem to speak to the strength of the Catholic religion in their household. That aside, I cannot imagine Billy worshiping anything but Satan. He was deeply into Heavy Metal music, drugs, and being an ass.
To me and numerous other people who actually knew him it is baffling that he hasn’t been done away with by now. Billy and the whole incredulous story of his prolonged existence is like an albatross around the neck of our generation. The pain of an injection needle? His victim suffered that a thousandfold, and he had no compunctions about inflicting it on her.
April 17th, 2009 at 20:11
Interesting. Thanks for telling us what you know (and think) about this story.
For me it was just another news article – just something to ‘hang’ some broader points on.
It’s always good to be reminded that behind the almost abstract news paper headlines, there are whole communities living with the consequences of certain acts,
J.
September 3rd, 2010 at 02:39
Unique wedding concepts are extremely in demand nowadays. People would tend to pay on having their wedding in castles, beaches, parks or have themed weddings than having a customary one.