The execution of convicted-child killer Terry Clark, which is scheduled for Tuesday night, poses a dilemma for many in New Mexico, a state the has largely chosen to stay out of the fray when it comes to the death penalty.
Clark's execution will be the first in the state since the 1960s, but the gruesome details associated with the case have made it hard for even the most staunch anti-death penalty advocates to fight the decision to end his life. The victim's family wants to see him die and Clark has said he wants to be killed.
An open and shut case, right?
Not quite.
If we hold ourselves true to the principle of a free and democratic society, then the idea of the government stepping forth and taking a citizen's life is reprehensible, regardless of the circumstances.
As much as the family would like to see Clark suffer, his execution will not bring their daughter back. Clark's acceptance of his own death makes me wonder whether he would suffer more dying at the hands of the state or from a lengthy prison term.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
We know that in the most reprehensible cases, the threat of the death penalty does nothing to prevent crime and the notoriety of becoming a martyr +can even be a catalyst.
Surely we can come up with better ways to handle overcrowded prisons than executing the less desirable in our society. Hopefully the attention paid to this case will remind us of the problems that permeate our criminal justice system and push us to take action to correct them.
Iliana Lim¢n
Editor in chief
