Let me start by saying I am not rabidly pro-death penalty. I understand that in a country based on (ever diminishing) freedom, being locked away for the rest of your life is severe punishment.
That’s the concept behind today’s N&R editorial on Danny Hembree, the convicted murderer who recently described his life of leisure on Central Prison’s death row.
Here’s what jumped out at me (my emphasis):
So, what’s Hembree’s real punishment? It is to spend every day for the rest of his life in close confinement. He sleeps in a small, sparsely furnished cell. He has access to a day room with television but shares it with men who are all very bad characters. He is allowed outdoor exercise twice a week. He is allowed one visit a week with a maximum of two visitors. He can work inside the prison. He gets his meals.
Many would say it’s better than he deserves. Who could argue? He lives in humane conditions with his basic needs met.
Except the need for freedom.
As if those ‘very bad characters’ would somehow rub off on a guy convicted for strangling a 17-year-old girl and is accused of murdering two other women. I realize the N&R is rabidly anti-death penalty, and this editorial simply reiterating that stance as a counter point to the reaction Hembree’s letter sparked.
Still, Hembree’s letter was a cry for attention, nothing more, nothing less. The worst thing our local paper of record could do was give him that attention. If life in prison is —as the editorial states —- is “a slow death, one day after another,” then just let that be Hembree’s fate, with no fanfare attached.
