Nathaniel Woods: Deserves no sentence less than death? (op-ed)
“The murder of three police officers deserves no
sentence less than death.” That was the
conclusion of a 14-page letter sent to the Governor of Alabama by the state’s
Attorney General Steve Marshall. The
14-page letter detailed the events that led to the police murders in 2004. The letter also begged the governor not to
succumb to outside pressure and deny Nathaniel Woods’s request for a reprieve
of his execution.
The
outside pressure was initiated by celebrities, civil-rights icons, and
anti-death penalty activists who insisted the state of Alabama was about to
execute an innocent man. Woods’s
innocence was based off of statements made by death row inmate Kerry Spencer,
who admitted to killing the three police officers inside the “drug house” he
operated with Woods and another man named Fernando Belser. Spencer said Woods didn’t have a gun and
never fired a shot. Spencer said while
he was sleeping on the couch, with a gun by his side, the police came to serve
a warrant for Woods. Spencer heard
commotion, hopped up, saw people with their guns drawn, and started shooting.
Marshall,
who was also the district attorney that tried the Woods case, acknowledged during
the 2005 trial that Woods never fired a shot.
Marshall claimed the police officers went to the front door to serve the
warrant. (The police were at the “drug house”
earlier that day and Woods told them to get off his property and threatened
them. This was according to the testimony
of Marquita McClure Woods’s then-girlfriend.) The police informed Woods they
had a warrant and instructed Woods to come outside. Woods refused and warned the officers if they
came after him, they’ll get “F***ed up.”
Woods suddenly ran deeper into the “drug house” and the officers pursued
him. None of the officers had their guns
drawn, but one carried mace. Woods
surrendered to avoid being maced. Then
Spencer came from another room and shot the officers in the back with an
assault rifle. (This was according to the testimony of Fernando Belser who was
present during the shooting.) Woods
attempted to flee out the front door, but he noticed another police officer
outside. Woods yelled to Spencer “We got
another one out here!” And Spencer shot the outside officer in the leg. (This was according to the testimony of the
officer who was shot.)
The
public outcry over Woods’s innocence was based on the fact that he did not kill
the police officers. But a courtroom
does not determine innocence, it determines whether or not the accused is
guilty of specific charges. Woods was
charged with 4 counts of capital murder: Three counts of intentionally causing
the death of a police officer in the line of duty, and one count of killing two
or more persons pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct. Under Alabama law someone who helps kill a
police officer is just as guilty as the person who directly commits the
crime. (Alabama has executed two
individuals, since 1983, for being an accomplice to capital murder.)
The
governor of Alabama found no reason to halt the execution. (Neither did the
appellate court or the U.S. Supreme Court) Woods was executed on March 5, 2020.
But
here’s the problem.
The
state of Alabama permits juries to impose the death penalty without a unanimous
vote. The trial judge in the Woods
sentencing accepted a death recommendation from a 10-2 jury. Two jurors, that convicted Woods, thought Woods
deserved less than death (life without parole) because he didn’t pull the
trigger. Most proponents of capital
punishment believe the death penalty should be used sparingly and the jury’s
recommendation for a death sentence must be unanimous. So, the two dissenters should have spared
Woods from the death penalty and he should have been sentenced to life without
parole.
Alabama’s
practice of non-unanimous death sentencing was the actual culprit here. It’s a
classic example of what political philosopher John Stuart Mill called: The
tyranny of the majority.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier
3/11/2020
Comments
Post a Comment