(
JOHN CHAMBERS
Mr. Chairman, Gentlemen and Ladies, Mr. John Chambers
is quite unprepared because he just read of this thing in the morning paper and
had to change all of his plans and grab up all his material and get over here as
quickly as he could, and because of this I hope, or, however, in spite of this, I
hope I will not be rambling in these remarks.
But I need, first of all, as the Chairman suggested, to identify myself - not
that that makes any difference to anybody as to just who I am individually but
because of that which I represent. I come to you as the Executive Director of the
Kentucky Council of Churches. This needs to be explained just a bit. The Kentucky
Council of Churches is an officially established organization of some twenty
religious judicatories in this State of Kentucky. All of these are protestant.
This represents a total membership of some 600,000 Christian people with 2600
congregations and they have taken official action in the matter, passed a
resolution that they would like to have presented to the coming legislature, as
it has been presented in the past. I have copies of that, but the thing I want to
do here is first to make my personal statement, which I am able to do, I hope, in
a connected manner only because I recently wrote an article dealing with this and
I would just like to read this article. I think it
12.
sets it forth in a logical way. Otherwise, I would forget some points I would
like to present and over-emphasize others.
A new move in the program to abolish capital punishment brings encouragement to
those who have long sought its removal. For more than thirty-five years I have
joined with many others in the move to remove capital punishment from our State.
This has been done as an interested individual, as a pastor of local churches,
through denominational channels, in our own cummunion, the Christian Church
Disciples of Christ, and for the past twelve years as the Executive Director of
the Kentucky Council of Churches.
There have been many times when opponents of capital punishment felt that they
were fighting alone. They have seen bill after bill to abolish capital punishment
placed in the legislative hopper at Frankfort only to watch these bills die in
committee. They noted a new trend, however, in the last legislature when a bill
by the Reverend Herbert Tinsley of Warsaw was actually passed by the House 54 to
9. though it was later bottled up in the Senate Rules Committee. They find
support in the fact that eight states have already done away with the death
penalty. But they are most heartened by the recent announcements of Governor
Breathitt that he intends to ask the next legislature to remove the death penalty
in Kentucky.
13.
(
Our Governor is to be congratulated on his decision to take a clear-cut stand on
this issue. It not only shows courage of a high order but reveals a growing
conviction that this is the road to greater respect for man and his rights under
the law.
When questioned on this point by a group of ministers during his campaign for the
governorship, candidate Breathitt stated that he had not at that time arrived at
the place in his thinking where he was ready to approve the removal of the death
penalty. I quote this because I was one of those who questioned him, so I know.
He did tell the writer, however, that he would not veto such a law if the
legislature should enact it. He has now stated that all persons under sentence of
death at Eddyville will have their execution dates extended beyond the '66
legislature until the lawmakers have opportunity to act on his recommendation. We
believe that this is a most commendable action.
Though most major denominations of the United States have in recent years
repeatedly spoken out against capital punishment, as have nearly all Councils of
Churches, along with thousands of ministers, religious leaders, educators,
sociologists
and criminologists, it seems important for us to recall some of the reasons
behind these statements and some of the principal arguments they set forth. Now,
here they are:
(
L
14.
One. We believe that the death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent to crime.
This belief is undergirded by the attitude of prison administrators, chaplains
who have close contact with condemned persons, and those who have had the
responsibility of execution who have expressed their belief that those who commit
murder and other capital crimes are so mentally unstable or emotionally disturbed
at the time of their crimes that they give no thought to the possibility of being
executed.
Dr. Thorsten Sellin, of the University of Pennsylvania, noted authority on crime
and capital punishment, in 195B made an exhaustive study of the death penalty for
the American Law Institute. His conclusion: "Anyone who carefully examines this
data is bound to arrive at the conclusion that the death penalty, as we use it,
exercises no influence on the extent of capital crimes."
Some authorities even suggest that the death penalty may actually increase rather
than decrease capital crimes since conviction for capital offenses is more
difficult where the extreme penalty is sought. Increasingly jurors refuse to
serve and juries find it more difficult to reach verdicts in capital cases.
Here I would like to digress to make some statements.
One is that I have personally conversed with chaplains of two penal institutions
or reformatory institutions in Kentucky. I
15.
(
find that these men are very much opposed. These men who come
in contact with condemned persons are very much opposed to capital punishment.
Another thing is with regard to jurors here and the difficulty of securing
conviction. It is extremely difficult to get the right kind of jury even to try such
a case because the persons who have given most study and thought to this and have
arrived at intelligent decisions based upon factual evidence and the best testimony
they can get are the persons usually who must, when questioned by the attorneys,
say:."I must be excused because I am opposed to capital punishment." By our present
laws we eliminate those persons best qualified to serve on such juries. We eliminate
them from the possibility of serving.
Now, next we believe that capital punishment does not contribute to the protection
of society. Somebody said: "Who is going to speak for the women or the little seven
year old child who might be raped?" I think that the answer is very simple. Capital
punishment does not contribute to the protection of society. We recognize the right
of society to protect itself from dangerous individuals by confining them for life
in prisons or hospitals for the mentally ill but we hold that this is as far as
society has a right to go. After all, who determines who is dangerous and should be
executed? Adolph Hitler decided that a whole ethnic group - the Jews - should be
executed as dangerous,
(
L
16.
and several million innocent people were shamefully put to death because of that
decision. He represented the State exercising its right to destroy individuals.
We deny that the State has any such inherent right or that the destruction of
such persons is a protection to society.
Now. we believe that capital punishment discriminates against the poor. the
Negroes and other minority groups. In all too many cases where accused persons
are unable to employ counsel. the Court appointed attorneys are. one.
inexperienced or inefficient; two. have no opportunity to prepare adequate
defense; three. do not have funds with which to secure copies of records. trace
witnesses. and so on. or; four. do not have sufficient interest in the case to do
their best. In contrast with this is
the indisputable evidence that persons with money sufficient to procure skilled
attorneys and meet other necessary expenses of defense are seldom ever sentenced
to be executed.
We believe that the use of the death penalty has brought about the execution of
unknown numbers of innocent persons. If we had no other reason to oppose capital
punishment than this. we believe that this would be sufficient. Far better would
it be to let scores of the guilty live than to execute one innocent person.
The danger of executing the innocent has been forcefully called to the attention
of our society recently in the
17.
(
book, "Punishment Without Crime". This book tells the story of the false conviction
of one Isodore Zimmerman in the murder of a New York policeman in April of 1937.
Sentenc~d to be executed, Zimmerman had eaten the last meal. had his head shaved and
his trousers legs slit for the electrodes when his sentence was commuted by Governor
Lehman. He continued in prison, however, for twenty-four years before his innocence
was finally established a'nd he was released in 1962.
Finally, we believe that capital punishment must be opposed on moral and spiritual
grounds. We hold that the taking of the life of another in retribution is contrary to
the laws of God and violates the basic Christian concepts of the sacredness of life.
We join with the millions of thcughtful Christians who consider the death penalty no
less evil than the evils it seeks to punish. We link hands with the Lord of Life who
rejected the eye for an eye philosophy, and replaced it with "Recompense not evil
with evil"but overcome evil with good".
This is why we call upon people everywhere to join in a concerted effort to bring
about as speedily as possible the abolition of capital punishment.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN MILLS: I said nothing abou~ it in the beginning, and certainly we appreciate
the statement which Mr.Chambers
(
l
18.
