I’ve got to assume that there is nothing good to be said of Steven Hayes. If there was, Thomas Ullmann wouldn’t have had the clerk read from Joshua Komisarjevsky’s prison writings. Desperate measures are used when there’s nothing else to say. And let’s face it, this is the best case, and the worst case, to test the question of capital punishment, though that question really isn’t in Ullmann’s hands. He can do his best Darrow impression, and yet the decision will be left to jurors to decide whether they, on behalf of the state, will give Hayes better than he gave.
Each day, there is a television image of the one survivor, Dr. William Petit. The crimes committed against him pale compared to what happened to his wife, Jennifer Hawke-Petit and their daughters, Hayley Petit, 17 years old, and Michaela Petit, 11. He survived the night.
Petit has become the focus of intense media attention, and he’s used that to huge advantage. Complaints are heard that he’s doing everything in his power, plus some, to skew the outcome, manipulate the media and control the discussion.
If this had happened to your family, would you do less? If this had happened to your family, might you hope that the killers were given the ultimate punishment?
We can believe, as most criminal defense lawyers do, that capital punishment is wrong and shouldn’t be imposed on anyone. That belief is generic, disconnected from the facts of any individual case and based on our broader view of the system of justice, the validity of convictions, the merit of execution as a punishment and our view of humanity. Fair enough. I am against capital punishment.
But I cannot, and I will not, find fault with William Petit.
William Petit has suffered. If he’s half a man, he suffers more for what happened to his family than himself. If he’s a quarter of a man, he suffers unbearably for what happened to his daughters. I would take a bullet for my children without a moment’s hesitation, and I project my sensibilities on Petit. He is entitled to use, say, do anything, absolutely anything, to do now what he was unable to do then, to save his family.
This isn’t to suggest that Steven Hayes or Joshua Komisarjevsky should be sentenced to execution. Maybe there’s something good to be said about them. Maybe not. Either way, they will be sentenced to death, it being only a matter of how quickly. Neither one will be walking out of prison alive.
That’s where I stand. I hope that’s where the jury stands when all is said and done, making the decision that they, and we, are better than to impose capital punishment, whether or not Hayes and Komisarjevsky deserve their mercy. But William Petit does not have to see it the same way, and he can do anything he wants to do to prejudice the jury, the public, his deity, against these two human being.
Unless and until you can know what it’s like to be William Petit, you cannot criticize him for doing anything. Don’t call him a publicity hound or a media whore. Don’t question his motives or challenge his methods. Scrutinize everything about this case and the issues surrounding capital punishment all day long, but William Petit gets a pass.
No matter how unseemly you may find William Petit’s conduct, leave him alone. Anyone who has endured what happened to his wife and daughters can do anything he damn well pleases when it comes to the killers. Leave William Petit alone.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
When asked to state my beliefs on capital punishment, I always say that I am ok with the idea of a criminal dying as the result of committing a crime, but I don’t think the State should be the one doling out that punishment. By that I mean if someone breaks into your house to rape your kids and you blow their brains out, I have no problem with that, but our justice system is too haphazard to have that kind of justice being sanctioned by the State.
Well said. As long as Petit’s crusade is aimed only at the people who did this to his family, I think we can all forgive him for not paying as much attention as some of us would like to the bigger picture of criminal justice policy.
I’ve long been a supporter of capital punishment though my view is that there must be no doubt instead of “being beyond a reasonable doubt.” A man wrongfully imprisoned for 30 years can’t get those years back but can be given an enormous cash settlement. Execution isn’t something that can be undone.
This happens to be a “slam dunk.” No matter what the jury decides though, they won’t be able to give Hayes better than he gave. For that to even be possible, Hayes would have to be released a free man, then marry, have children, feed, clothe, and teach those children right from wrong. He’d have to come to love others more than himself.
After 20 years, the jury would have to rape and murder his wife and children, severely beat him, then let him live several years before executing him.
Only then could it be argued that he was proportionately punished. Living with a death sentence or a life behind bars is a doddle in comparison.
Thanks for making the case for Petit’s actions. He’d be justified for doing much worse than he is but – even for those of us on the farthest peripheral – it’s good to hear a case made for him.
It’s eerie hearing this sort of thing. People are too good at thinking up things that other people deserve.
What he deserves is irrelevant.
Neither I, nor the jury, nor anyone else will get to act on what he thinks Hayes deserves. The jury will decide what will happen to him – whether or not he deserves worse is pretty much a matter of opinion.
I was stating what would be proportional – i.e. a like punishment for his crimes. Stating that doesn’t imply that I would support such a system. I don’t. Nor do I advocate any system that brings physical harm to the relatives of the accused.
Sorry, I misspoke. I should have said that people are too good at thinking up “proportional punishments”. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
Sorry for the eerie. I’m working on the subtlety. 🙂
No, yours is simply a recitation of what he allegedly (slam dunk but still, make them do their job) did – that’ll be in the case report. The actual stuff makes sense for this story. It’s the more-than-death element that I find eerie.
The personal context is that you’ll see death-penalty’s-nuthin people pull out lengthy blog comments about how you flay them alive and dip them in acid (I sometimes end up more scared of the blog commentator than the convicted murderer). The death penalty’s pretty bad and death plus AIDS is fun and cathartic to think about but it’s just gravy. I think “I believe in the death penalty and this guy did it, therefore he should get the death penalty” is really enough to be getting on with without even going into “death’s a total skoosh compared to what he did”.