If The Green River Killer Doesn't Deserve Death, Who Does?

by Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Muhammad's alleged crimes are heinous, repulsive, caused much personal pain and suffering and terrorized several states; yet technically he is being tried for only one murder. The case against him is mostly circumstantial, and there is much dispute over whether he, or his teenage sidekick, Lee Malvo, was the actual triggerman. If Muhammad is convicted -- and the betting odds are he will be -- Virginia will put him on the fast track to the death gurney. Ridgway, meanwhile, arguably the most gruesome serial killer in U.S. history, will live.

But Muhammad, if convicted, wouldn't be the only condemned murderer to face execution or be executed for the killing of a single victim. And Ridgeway is not the first multiple murderer to be spared execution.

In fact, the list of those who have committed multiple murders yet didn't get the death penalty is endless. It includes mafia hit men, wealthy celebrities, businessmen and athletes. There are 20,000-plus homicides in America yearly; only a few hundred of those convicted of murder get the death penalty.

Legal experts and philosophers may fiercely debate whether one life is more valuable than another, but there's tacit recognition in American law, public policy and custom that some lives are, in fact, more valued than others. Ridgway's victims were poor girls and young women who were runaways, drug users or prostitutes. Their family members repeatedly slammed authorities for foot-dragging in their investigation. Muhammad's alleged victims were upright citizens.

If the convicted killer is black or Latino or has a rotten attorney and the victim is white, middle-class or well educated, and the murder is committed anywhere in the South, the likelihood is much greater that the criminal will face execution.

In any case, the U.S. Supreme Court long ago rendered moot the debate over the proportionality of capital punishment, ruling in 1984 that the Constitution does not require the punishment to always fit the heinousness of the crime. The Court did urge the states to prevent "excessive" or "disproportionate" sentencing in death penalty cases.

Though not legally obliged, most states with capital punishment have set "mitigating circumstances" -- age, mental capacity, abuse (sexual, drug, and alcohol) -- for judges and juries to consider in determining whether a death sentence is appropriate. Many studies have found that many of the more than 3,000 death row prisoners have either been beaten, brutalized, sexually assaulted or are mentally retarded or subliterate.

The day before Ridgway copped his plea, Georgia executed a mentally ill killer, and two days after, North Carolina was set to execute a similar prisoner. The state will execute another mentally retarded man in December. In each case, the prisoner was convicted of one murder.

Death penalty opponents hope that Ridgway's skipped date with the hangman will make more Americans question the fairness of capital punishment. But if anything, it could deepen public suspicion that killers routinely manipulate the criminal justice system; it could increase the clamor for more and speedier executions. A CNN poll found that most Americans were appalled by the deal and wanted Ridgeway executed.

America's most prolific serial murderer will spend his life in prison, but many others who killed far fewer victims won't. This is yet another absurdity of the death penalty. It can never be applied fairly. If it was practically abolished for Ridgway, it should be abolished for all.