On May 27, the Governor declined to intervene in the execution of Kevin Greene. Statements from AG and 2009 Republican candidate for governor Bob McDonnell along with LG Bill Bolling were dutifully reprinted throughout the right side of the Virginia political blogosphere, with most of the posts reflecting the sentiment that Kaine had kept his word to uphold the law. Blogs on the left, though, weren’t so happy with the decision and took Kaine to the proverbial woodshed.
Percy Levar Walton was scheduled to die last night. Governor Tim Kaine intervened and commuted Walton’s three life sentences to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Right on cue, McDonnell and Bolling reacted with their own opinions on the governor’s actions, and, once again, the right side of the Virginia blogosphere dutifully reprinted those statements, this time saying that Kaine went back on his word. Of course, I don’t expect anything different from them; after all, they are consistent in their belief that the death penalty should always be carried out. I don’t agree with them, but I have to respect their consistency.
The left? Well, let’s just say that the outrage expressed two weeks ago hasn’t been matched with kudos this time around. As I have perused the various blog aggregators, I’ve only seen one post applauding Kaine for his action. And that’s just wrong.
I suspect part of the reason for the silence is that some of these folks are mad at Kaine for endorsing Gerry Connolly over netroots favorite Leslie Byrne in the 11th CD primary. But that shouldn’t have anything to do with this situation. If you are going to savage the guy when he does something that you disagree with, you should be as strong in your message when he does something that you agree with.
And folks wonder why blogs lack credibility.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Vivian
As a voice I respect in the blogosphere, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this one. Putting aside folks who are 100% pro or against the death penalty, this particular case raises some unique issues and role the Governor and judiciary play in the process.
Well, let me start by saying that although my own little brother was murdered, the death penalty is not one of my top issues. It’s on my list, just not a major priority.
As for this particular case – I don’t see an issue with the governor exercising his prerogative. He believes that the man is mentally incompetent and as the result, should not be executed. He used his authority to do what he thought was right. It wasn’t capricious, it wasn’t just because he opposes the death penalty personally. He came to his decision after a careful weighing of the facts as he understands them.
Those who disagree say that the judiciary has spoken and Kaine shouldn’t have done that – I disagree. There are three branches of government and none of them should defer to the other. If the legislative branch wants to remove the power from the executive branch to stop executions, then they have every right to do so. Until and unless that happens, the governor has every right to act as he did.
I suspect that the courts (all of which found Walton competent) have a better handle on Walton’s mental state than Gov. Kaine has. He should just admit that he doesn’t want Virginia executing anyone.
What’s the unique issue, SR? As Vivian puts it, the law provides for the governor to make a judgment call in these cases, and Kaine did it.
~
Vivian, you raise a fair point about following condemnation with praise (tho’ I don’t think I was condemning, when I wrote about Kevin Green’s execution). I did send a note of thanks to his office this morning, after hearing about it on the radio this AM. Haven’t written about it because, well . . . you’re right. I should have. And will.
Brian – that’s BS. How many executions have taken place in VA since Kaine took office? How many has he stopped? If the man was committed to not wanting VA to execute anyone, do you think he would have allowed the execution two weeks ago?
MB – This case is unique because his mental competency is such a close call and the 4th Circuit only found him competent in a 7-6 decision.
As I noted my own post, I am not an advocate for the death penalty. That mostly because politicians (and the public too) have made such a mess of it. Kaine, for example, promised to set his personal conviction that the death penalty is wrong and allow the system to work. So far, I would say he has shown serious relunctance to allow the system to work.
Is Percy Walton crazy or has the threat of execution focused his mind? I guess only time will tell how good our governor is at remote psychology.
What follows is from http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-va–virginiaexecution0608jun08,0,5546761.story.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional to execute the insane or those with an IQ less than 70, established by the age of 18, who lack basic adaptive skills.
No competency hearing was held before Walton was sentenced to death, and mental evaluations have yielded conflicting results.
Walton scored 90 and 77 on intelligence tests taken when he was 17 and 18, respectively. After he was sentenced to death, Walton’s scores declined.
Several of Walton’s fellow death row inmates told The Associated Press in 2006 that Walton spends his days laughing to himself and talking to voices in his head, and that he is incapable of engaging in any meaningful conversation. Walton’s prison nickname is “Crazy Horse.”
Vivian,
One cannot read the Governor’s clemency decision and reasonably conclude that Walton is or was sane. He wasn’t sane when he committed these crimes and he damn sure ain’t now. The Governor compassionate decision should be praised from all quarters. Kaine is an outstanding public servant. Anybody who believes that the Fourth Circuit is capable of doing the right thing about anything should have their mental competence scrutinized.
You know, it’s actually not that unique. You know how far back do you have to go to find an inmate in Virginia whose lawyers claimed mental incompetency and who was executed after careful evaluation and deliberation?
About 14 days.
The Governor is clearly not giving everyone who claims incompetency a free pass, as he executed Green in spite of his lawyer’s claims that he was mentally retarded. So you either have to assume that Governor Kaine decides who lives and dies with a dice throw, or that he takes his office very seriously and deliberates each case on its individual merits.
Very well put, SD.
SR, it strikes me that when a question is that close – and we’re talking capital punishment – it’s not really a close question at all.
I for one am with Governor Kaine in that I don’t believe the death penalty is right. However, I do commend him for making the judgment call he is supposed to make as Governor, and I plan to begin asking my senators and delegates to act to end the death penalty in Virginia. I know…..dead in the water…..but everything starts somewhere.
Also, Vivian, fair point about the lack of praise for Kaine on this decision. Inconsistent at best since there was apparently outcry when he failed to do so in another case which I suspect did not possess the same set of facts (mentally incompetent prisoner). However, and I’m not saying you are doing this, but I am not sure I would ascribe any intentional malice to bloggers who’ve failed to notice or failed to publish anything about Kaine’s decision (because they may have noticed and chosen to cover other topics). But one would think if they’re legitimately concerned on the issue and spoke out about it when they didn’t like the decision, that they’d take note and do as you suggest.
Vivian
Do you doubt Gov. Kaine’s opposition to the death penalty? He had cover in this case, that’s all. He’s a politician like any other – he values his career. My preference would be for him to simply announce that no more executions would take place on his watch. Since that would be a principled stance, I’m not getting my hopes up.
Brian – The governor has a personal stance against the death penalty but he promised the voters of VA that he would uphold the law. I believe he has done that. Now had he said that he would not sign any death warrants when he was running, once elected he could have taken that principled stance to which you refer. I don’t know Kaine’s heart – I only have his public comments to go on.
DiMV – I’m not ascribing malice, only pointing out what I think is unfair. If blogs are the op-ed pages of the internet, do we not have a responsibility – not only to ourselves but to our readers – to at least be consistent?
“Walton scored 90 and 77 on intelligence tests taken when he was 17 and 18, respectively. After he was sentenced to death, Walton’s scores declined.”
Indeed, his scores were declining before he was sentenced, and indeed before he committed the murders.
If not for deterrence, capital punishment has no purpose. There is no deterrence value in executing Walton — only vengence, and that is not ours.
Biblically (OT), there were two reasons for capital punishment — as a sin offering and because there were no prisons. Most crimes/sins could be dealt with via repentance, a sin offering, and recompence for the injured party. Other crimes and sins, such as murder and homosexual acts, were too great for any sacrifice less than a human life. Then came Jesus. He did not change the requirements for atonement — He just took the punishment upon Himself.
Anon E. Mouse – To say religion has no place in our system of justice would be absurd. So I would not be surprised if many people regard capital punishment as a form of sacrifice and penance. Certainly, many did in earlier eras. The days, however, I fear too many regard the death penalty as righteous vengence. That I cannot defend. Most, however, I think regard the death penalty as an act of self defense. That I can defend.
Nonetheless, I have given up on the death penalty. We have reached the point I have up on the death penalty. When a large enough minority opposes a law, that law cannot be effectively enforced (particularly when the governor does not want to enforce the law). With respect to the death penalty, we have reached such a threshold.
This dilemma illustrates an observation made by some of our nation’s Founders. When a nation has a republican government and elects its governing officials, the laws of the land require widespread support. Otherwise, juries will not convict, and judges will not pass sentence. That is why the Founders insisted that only a moral People could maintain such a form of government.