Life Without Parole

Worse Than Death?

Ross Kleinstuber, Jeremiah Coldsmith, Margaret Leigey, Sandra Joy

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000574715
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

This book is an in-depth critical examination of all pertinent aspects of life without parole (LWOP). Empirically assessing key arguments that advance LWOP, including as an alternative to the death penalty, it reveals that not only is the punishment cruel while not providing any societal benefits, it is actually detrimental to society.

Over the last 30 years, LWOP has exploded in the United States. While the use of capital punishment over that same time period has declined, it must be recognized that LWOP is, in fact, a hidden death sentence. It is, however, implemented in a way that allows society to largely ignore this truth. While capital punishment has rightfully been subject to intense debate and scholarship, LWOP has mostly escaped such scrutiny. In fact, LWOP has been touted by both death penalty abolitionists and by tough-on-crime conservatives, which has allowed it to flourish under the radar. Specifically, abolitionists have advanced LWOP as a palatable alternative to capital punishment, which they perceive as inhumane, error-prone, costly, and racially biased. Conservatives, meanwhile, advocate for LWOP as an effective means of fighting crime, a just form of retribution, and necessary tool for managing incorrigible offenders. This book seeks to tap into and help inform this growing debate by subjecting these key arguments to empirical scrutiny. The results of those analyses fail to produce any evidence in support of any of those various justifications and therefore suggest that LWOP should be abolished and replaced with life sentences that come with parole eligibility after a maximum of 25 years.

The book will be of great interest to students and scholars of criminology and criminal justice and will also have crossover appeal into the fields of law, political science, and sociology. It will also appeal to criminal justice professionals, lawmakers, activists, and attorneys, as well as death penalty abolitionists, opponents of mass incarceration, advocates for sentencing reform, and supporters of prisoners' rights.

Part IExamining the Abolitionist Case for LWOP

1Is LWOP Inhumane? The View from Death Row

DOI: 10.4324/​9781003161783-3

Once a capital defendant is found guilty, the case moves to the sentencing phase. In most states, the two potential outcomes of this sentencing hearing are either a death sentence or the sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP). Considering the two options, it comes as no surprise that the sentence containing the word “life” is generally preferred by many of those affiliated with the defendant. The defense team implores the jury to choose LWOP over the death penalty for their client, and family members of the defendant often take the stand to beg for the life of their loved one to be spared. When the judge condemns the convicted defendant to death, then most people—including most death penalty abolitionists—assume that the worst possible outcome for the defendant has occurred. Yet, what do those who have been condemned think about their new fate? Are they just as devastated to receive a death sentence, or do they consider this outcome preferable to a LWOP sentence? To answer this question, in this chapter, we will consider the words of individuals who have actually experienced this outcome, including those who “volunteered” to be executed, those living on death row, and those with the unique experience of having initially been sentenced to death before having their sentences altered to LWOP. The answers provided by these individuals challenge the commonsense notion that LWOP is a better fate than death. Instead, their stories point to the counterintuitive and surprising possibility that LWOP may be a fate worse than death.

The Phenomenon of Death Row “Volunteers”

One phenomenon that seriously challenges the idea that LWOP is preferable to a death sentence is the existence of so-called death penalty “volunteers.” These are individuals who have dropped their appeals in an effort to hasten their own executions (Blume, 2005). According to data collected by the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), between 1976 and 2019, there were at least 149 of these so-called volunteers (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019), or about 10% of all executions over this time period. But why would anyone willingly forfeit their attempt to overturn their death sentence and, in essence, reduce the amount of time until their own death? While previous research has found that the harsh and inhumane conditions of death row itself often produce severe depression, anxiety, and suicidality—a condition referred to as “death row syndrome”—which contributes to the decision of some to “volunteer” for an execution (Smith, 2008), the data gathered by the DPIC indicate that for a significant number of “volunteers,” their decision was driven by a desire to avoid the dreaded alternative of a long, agonizing life sentence without the possibility of parole, which is all that many death row inhabitants ever expect to “win” from their death penalty appeals (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019).

The DPIC’s data include all details that could be found from media sources about the reasons why “volunteers” made the decision to turn down their appeals and volunteer for their own execution, so it is possible to hear from these individuals in their own words. While most “volunteers” did not provide a reason for their decision, among those who did, nearly half (46%) indicated that their decisions were driven by a desire to avoid the only alternative that they were able to see to their death sentence: being made to live out the rest of their natural life in prison. For instance, in 2006, Alabama death row inmate Mario Centobie opposed his attorney’s attempts to block his execution, saying that he was “sane, but preferred death over life in prison” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019). In 2004, Nevada volunteer Terry Dennis was more specific with his opposition, having said at a hearing that he refused to appeal his death sentence because “Death is preferable to another 15–20 years in prison” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019). After sitting on Florida’s death row for eight years, Newton Slawson similarly ended his appeals process, telling a judge “there simply comes a time when death is a release, not a punishment” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019). In the most blatant statement listed among the volunteers noted on the DPIC website about the humanity of the death penalty versus that of LWOP, Indiana death row inmate Kevin Conner told Governor Mitch Daniels that “killing a person is far more honest and humane than imposed repression under the guise of justice in the penal system” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019).

Numerous other volunteers are quoted on the DPIC website, having made similar statements of their motivation for refusing to pursue their appeals. Over and over again, statements of volunteers read that they simply did not want to spend the rest of their lives in prison. Several of them added that they were “tired of prison life,” thus had come to see their execution as offering them a release from the horrors of death row, as well as a way to prevent them from experiencing the horror that they were able to imagine awaited them if they were to “win” a life sentence behind bars. Still others decided to speed up the process even further by taking their own lives. The suicide rate on death row is typically many times greater than the suicide rate in free society—even though the suicide rate in state prisons is almost always lower than the suicide rate in free society (Tartaro & Lester, 2016). While we cannot know for certain the reason these individuals chose to take their own lives, it is a reasonable assumption that for many of them, death was preferable to living in prison for the rest of their lives.

The Perspective of the Non-Volunteers

Of course, since most of those sentenced to death do not volunteer to be executed, the perspective of “volunteers” may not be representative of everyone sentenced to death. Otherwise, we might expect even more volunteers. Therefore, to get a fuller understanding of how those facing a death sentence perceive their own fates, as part of an earlier study, one of the authors interviewed 14 of the 16 men (88%) who were on Delaware’s death row at the time (the other two men declined to participate) (Joy, 2014). All of these men revealed that they were fighting their death sentence in hopes of being released, either because they maintained their innocence and hoped to be exonerated or because they were hopeful that they may be commuted to a lesser sentence that would eventually allow them to be released from prison. When asked about their stance on LWOP as an alternative to the death penalty, all 14 of these men indicated that they do not view LWOP as an acceptable alternative. These men stated that they are fighting their cases in the courts in hopes of being released back into society, and nearly all of them indicated that if they knew that their legal battles would end with a LWOP sentence, they would not continue their fight. In such a case, they would resign themselves to their death sentence and many of them stated that they would even expedite the process by turning down their appeals and volunteering for their own execution. As one Delaware death row inhabitant shared at that time, approximately one decade ago, “I would not fight for a life sentence in this prison EVER! And if I knew that LWOP was my only option, no I would never fight.” To highlight this point, another condemned man stated, “I would consider suicide if my sentence was reduced to LWOP. I don’t wish to spend the rest of my days on earth in this place.” Another man who sat on Delaware’s death row at the same time echoed this sentiment, stating, “I would rather die than spend the rest of my life in prison because LWOP is a death sentence. It’s just a long and slow death that will eat at your soul and your mind until you die. Think of it like a Band-Aid. You would much rather pull it off quickly, with one pull. Sure it hurts, but not as long as it will if you try to pull it off slowly.” This man further indicated that he would go as a volunteer to avoid LWOP, stating “I would stop all my appeals that were still in court to make sure that I didn’t end up with a LWOP sentence.”

Shortly after gathering data from the 14 men on Delaware’s death row who agreed to participate in the study, another individual on Delaware’s death row, Shannon Johnson, “won” his battle with the courts to be executed. Ever since he was convicted of capital murder in 2008, he told every judge, jury, and lawyer that he saw that he wanted to be executed. Just four years later, Mr. Johnson finally won his fight to reject his appeals and became the fifth volunteer in Delaware to be executed during the contemporary death penalty era (out of a total of 16 executions in Delaware that had occurred since the state resumed executions two decades earlier in 1992). Johnson’s last words before he was executed were “Death before dishonor.” While he was not explicit with his meaning of these words, it can be argued that he considered life in prison as dishonoring him and thus felt compelled to choose death instead.

This perspective is not unique to Delaware. A 1991 study in Tennessee revealed that half of the state’s death row inhabitants who were surveyed preferred death to LWOP (Wright, 1991). Two decades later, the Campaign to End the Death Penalty surveyed California’s death row about their views on Proposition 34, a 2012 voter referendum that attempted to repeal capital punishment in the state and replace it with LWOP. Of the 50 who responded to the survey, 47 (94%) opposed the repeal effort (Egelko, 2014). In an op-ed for the Socialist Worker in 2012, Darrell Lomax, a California death row inhabitant who maintains his innocence, explained his rationale for opposing the repeal, writing that “it is wrong to advocate for a sentence of life without parole (LWOP)—which is a death sentence simply being called by another name.” He went on to refer to the state’s proposed death penalty repeal referendum as “a slow death for all those currently incarcerated on California’s death row—still death just by a different name” (Lomax, 2012).

The Experience of Being Resentenced from Death to LWOP

Skeptics could easily question the resolve of individuals on death row who adamantly state they would rather choose death over LWOP when LWOP is merely a hypothetical possibility. Would they so easily prefer the death penalty over a sentence of LWOP if the latter became a reality? Unbeknownst to the men who sat on Delaware’s death row a decade ago, they would soon be able to answer this question, as LWOP did become a reality for them in 2016 when the Delaware Supreme Court deemed the state’s capital sentencing statute ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Endorsements Page
• Half-Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction: Meet the New Death Penalty: Life Without Parole
• Part I Examining the Abolitionist Case for LWOP
• Part II Examining the Tough-on-Crime Case for LWOP
• Index