I Wish I'd Said That

I've had the discussion often this semester -- in every class, I think. Maybe it's after watching Get on the Bus, or reading an article about BET.

"Why do they get their own network? You know what would happen if somebody tried to start "White Entertainment TV?" And I try to explain that there's still an essential difference in America between being born black and being born white.

Well, of course I'm not the only one being caught up in this discussion. Mark Olsen and David Schraub have been having it, too.

Who are they? Just two guys out in the blogosphere. Schraub is a college student, but he frames the issue of race, the past and the present, and our moral responsibility in a way that makes a lot of sense to me.

To begin with, I'd like to offer up a premise, which I think is rather intuitive but which I am open to hearing a critique of: Human beings have a moral obligation to try and remedy unjust systems of which they are the beneficiary.

In other words, the reason we're living in our pleasant suburb, where our biggest worry is a drive-by pastry-pasting, can be traced back to our immediate ancestors. The better off they were, the better off we are. And although we may not have a racist bone in our bodies, we have benefited from racist policies in the past. And, says Straub, we're morally obligated to do something about it.

If you've got a few extra moments, read through his piece.

[One of Life's Little Ironies (proof of Melville's genius) -- I'd bet that those are are most likely to read this will be those least likely to need to read it.]

Just When You Thought It Couldn't Get Any Worse

I know you're in there.

For Michaelene (and all Seniors)

I don't know how many of you besides Michaelene (Chris, Betsy, Jeni, Kathryn -- I'm pretty sure we did this, too) have studied Coleridge's "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" in Senior English. But if you have, I'm sure you'll appreciate this as much as I did. . .

Consider "Consider the Source"

You may remember that we have an additional blog associated with this class: Consider the Source. This is where you are encouraged to create your own blog entries.

So far Patrick is the only one to take advantage of it. Not just once, but twice. Check it out.

Deep in the Heart of Texas

Here's a story that Nick would love. (I could actually hear him cackling in the background as I read the story.)

Scott Panetti was put on trial. He asked to represent himself. The great state of Texas agreed that that was fine by them.

Now there's an old saying that "the man who represents himself has a fool for a client". In this case: true.

In and out of mental institutions 14 times and addicted to drugs and alcohol since he almost drowned as a child and was nearly electrocuted by a power line, Mr. Panetti wore cowboy costumes to court, delivered rambling monologues, put himself on the witness stand and sought to subpoena the pope, Jesus and John F. Kennedy.

Panetti called himself as a witness. Well, sort of. . .

Taking on his defense, and calling himself as a witness, he argued that he had been taken over by an alter ego he called Sarge Ironhorse.

"Sarge boom boom," Mr. Panetti testified. "Sarge is gone. No more Sarge. Sonja and Birdie. Joe, Amanda lying kitchen, here, there blood. No, leave. Scott, remember exactly what Sarge did. Shot the lock. Walked in the kitchen. Sonja, where's Birdie? Sonja here."

You'd think the jury would be delighted to witness such an entertaining trial, but apparently not.

Jurors were clearly alienated and took little more than an hour to reject his insanity defense.

Here's where things get a little more interesting. Turns out he's on trial for murder. Should a guy this crazy -- and everybody agrees he's crazy --

The three-judge panel in Mr. Panetti's case acknowledged that he was mentally ill with what has been diagnosed as schizoaffective disorder and that he thus might lack a rational understanding of his fate. But the panel nonetheless ruled that he was competent to be executed because he was able to understand the stated basis for his execution.

David R. Dow, a law professor at the University of Houston who has met more than 75 death row inmates, visited Mr. Panetti at his lawyers' request. "Of all the people I have met on death row, he's the gold-medal-crazy winner," Professor Dow said.

be executed? Well, this is Texas, after all.

"In Texas," said Greg Wiercioch, a lawyer with the Texas Defender Service who has consulted with Mr. Panetti's defense, "if you cast a shadow on a sunny day, you're competent to be executed."

Actually, he's considered "sane" if he knows what he did, and he knows he can be executed for it.

Robert Blecker, a law professor at the New York Law School and a cautious supporter of the death penalty, said Mr. Panetti's execution could serve the goal of retribution.

"He knows what he did," Professor Blecker said. "He knows what the state is about to do to him, and why. For the retributivist, the past counts. It counts for us, and for us to be retributively satisfied, it must also count for him."

Prosecutors made the same point in a brief to the Fifth Circuit last year.

"All that is required to avoid the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is that the petitioner factually understand the reason for this punishment," the prosecutors wrote.

So, by that standard, he's sane. "Some people" still find such an execution disquieting.

Some judges say the "miserable spectacle" of such executions simply offends humanity. Others say retribution is not served by executing someone who cannot understand why he is being put to death. Still others point to the inability of the insane to assist their lawyers in last-minute litigation. In the Middle Ages, it was thought that madness was its own punishment.

Oh well, it could be worse.

Executions of inmates who exhibited signs of madness are not unusual. In 1992, Arkansas executed Ricky Ray Rector not long after he put aside the dessert of his last meal to eat later.

The death penalty. Ya gotta love it!

(Oh, and a little postscript. This story appeared on page A18 in the New York Times -- buried well inside. But it was prominently displayed in between Page 1 stories on the Times website. I don't know what that means, exactly, but I found it interesting.)

Realm of the Bizarre -- Update

Nick told us about a girl "killed" in an auto accident, who was actually alive and in the hospital -- in a coma. The girl supposed to be in the hospital, the girl whose parents for five weeks were waiting by her bedside for her to come out of her coma -- already dead and buried. How could this happen?

Not identical, but similar. Add swelling from facial injuries, and I guess it could happen . It did happen.

But two weeks ago, Ms. VanRyn's college roommate told officials at Taylor University in Upland, Ind., that she doubted it was really Laura recuperating in the hospital, The Associated Press reported.

Representatives of the rehabilitation center where Ms. Cerak is recovering said that relatives and physical therapists at the facility began to question their patient's identity only last Sunday, when she began answering questions posed to Laura with, "No, it's Whitney."

Bruce Rossman, a spokesman for the Spectrum Health hospital system, said less than 24 hours passed from the time Ms. Cerak began saying her name to the time her identity was confirmed using dental records.

Plans are being made to disinter Laura for burial in a family plot. (They plan to check dental records just to make sure.)

A horrific story, and doubly heart-breaking to the families involved, especially the VanRyns.

But I couldn't help but think it would make a great scary movie. Two almost identical victims, one dead, one in a coma. The one coming out of the coma, thought to be Laura, claims "I'm Whitney." But dental records show that she is Laura. But she isn't, she's Whitney -- all of Whitney's memories and personality. Where the story goes from there, I don't know, but it's a creepy start.