Hon. Arnold Schwarzenegger
Governor
State of California
Oct. 29, 2005
Clemency for Stanley “Tookie”
Williams
Dear Governor,
I want to share my thoughts and experiences with you in the matter of Stanley
“Tookie” Williams. Since you will receive many legal arguments
about the case or the merits of the death penalty, this letter will focus on
the “Tookie” Williams I actually know. In the course
of researching a book on street gangs, I interviewed him for two hours on
San Quentin’s Death Row in late 2001. In addition, I have read thousands
of pages of briefs about the case, and interviewed numerous people in Watts and South Central about his role in the Crips.
I can say without question that “Tookie” Williams has changed his
life direction, beginning about 1992.
I can say without question that his advocacy of peace among gang members during
the past decade has saved lives.
If you choose to execute him, you will be executing a living resource of great
value in the long struggle to prevent gang violence.
His execution will not deter the growth of street gangs.
It may provide an Old Testament sense of justice for some victims, and satisfy
prosecutors who want to see the “godfather” of the Crips put to
death. It is not the interest of the people of California to satisfy those needs. Nor is it
in your interest as a national and global representative of our country.
I am not known for being an active death penalty abolitionist, though I pursued
funding to study a moratorium as a legislator. But I believe that in this case,
the interest of the people of California
is in clemency. In granting clemency, you are not required to release him, but
you have the power to make him continue his counseling against gangs and
violence as a community benefit and an example of restorative justice.
Taking “Tookie” Williams’ life would be an awesome personal
responsibility for any governor. You yourself know the value of inner city
youth programs. You yourself stand for a return to rehabilitation as a cornerstone
of our system. It must be apparent to you that “Tookie” Williams
can reach out to kids in places where social workers fear to tread, police can
rarely penetrate, and parents throw up their hands.
Even assuming what the prosecution says about his guilt – and like many
others, I am not in agreement with them - “Tookie” Williams cannot
be a resource for violence prevention if he is dead.
Is it the state’s interest to inflict violence by execution against an
inmate who is himself a resource against violence? Or should
“Tookie” Williams’ sentence be to work against violence for
the rest of his days?
I urge you to accept a standard of reasonable doubt. Should a man be executed
where there are such significant differences of opinion over what his fate
should be? The current headlines proclaim him a “killer” and leave
the public impression that the only choices are execution or release to the
streets. But in a case surrounded by doubt, clemency allows a governor more
nuanced choices, including life without parole.
I have said, based on all I know, that “Tookie” Williams has
changed. On the other side are those who might agree that he has changed, but
are unforgiving nevertheless. Others simply deny that he has changed at all,
offering no evidence for their assertions. [I remember intervening as a senator
in 2000 when San Quentin authorities were required to remove from their files
an assertion that “Tookie” Williams was still a Crip member, long
after his public departure from the gang.]
There are prosecutors who demand that “Tookie” Williams drop his
innocence claim and acknowledge guilt and remorse as the only definition of
personal change that matters. This is not so legally, and I would remind you
that the entire Rampart scandal began with judge and prosecution sentencing a
young man to 23 years behind bars in large part because of his refusal to
express remorse. That young man, a paraplegic due to a Rampart
police shooting, was eventually freed and declared innocent.
The law is flexible on the defining what constitutes an inmate’s change
of behavior. In this matter, we know that “Tookie” Williams, at the
request of Tony Bogard and others, communicated a strong message of support for
the truce between Crips and Bloods and the formation of Hands Across Watts in
1992, thirteen years ago, and has been pursuing the same mission ever since.
The citywide gang homicide rate dropped from the 800 level to half that
rate in a few short years; in South Central from 466 in 1992 to 223 by 1998.
The LA Times reported that “police and residents of Watts
confirm that gang-on-gang slayings over emotional issues of turf boundaries or
gang clothing have virtually disappeared.” Of course “Tookie”
Williams was not the primary cause of these truces, but he definitely
was part of the turn toward peace that occurred among thousands of young people
whom the authorities considered incorrigible. Is that not evidence of change?
Is that not proof of community benefit? Does a consistent message for over a
decade count for nothing?
As for his motivation, I can only report what he told me. Many individuals,
including icons like Malcolm X, only begin to change when they “hit
bottom.” For inmates like “Tookie”, that sometimes means the
Security Housing Unit, or “the hole”, where they suffer extreme and
prolonged deprivation and isolation. Many never recover from the experience.
“Tookie” Williams spent six years in “the hole” before
he began an awakening. In a darkness analogous to
Plato’s cave or Dante’s cold lowest depths, “Tookie”
told me he discovered “how to reason.” An illiterate, he learned to
spell and form words. He asked if I knew the word “anachronism” and
when I nodded, he said “I think we were an anachronism. We were meant to
be born in a warrior era.”
With reason and a dictionary, he studied the history of Africans in America and, as
he told me, learned “we’re not worthless individuals driven by
self-hate.” This is very much the recovery experience described by Dr.
James Gilligan, who interviewed convicted murderers for thirty years, and
described his findings in Violence, Our Deadly Epidemic; see also The
Autobiography of Malcolm X, or Luis Rodriguez, La Vida Loca, for
other transformation stories. They are the living dead, engulfed in shame,
lacking nonviolent tools of expression, finding respect and reputation only
through violence. They project their self-hate onto external victims but also
onto themselves. Nevertheless, some of them find their way back.
“Tookie” Williams transitioned through all that madness, largely
on his own. His path from the hole led to the discovery that he was endowed
with conscience, he told me. From there he experienced remorse for years of “megalomania” in which “violence
was the answer to everything” in his life. It was among the living dead
in San Quentin that he found he could keep little homeboys on the outside from
falling into the same tomb. “I’m not doing this to improve my
case”, he told me. “I am doing this for my own redemption”,
so that he could better face the possibility of death.
“Tookie” Williams is a different man than half a lifetime ago. But
whether one agrees or not with my assessment of his inner life, there are many
in the mainstream who argue for clemency. On Sept. 10,
2002, the same U.S Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld his conviction
[on a divided vote] added that “Williams’ good works and
accomplishments since incarceration make him a worthy candidate for the
exercise of gubernatorial discretion”, or clemency. This gesture was, as
far as I know, unprecedented; the prosecutor said, “I have never seen
anything like this, certainly nothing so blatant or specific.”
The Los Angeles
Times editorialized that while “Tookie” Williams is “no
candidate for sainthood, he is one for clemency. The effort that he has put
into undoing that harm is a powerful argument for saving his life.”
An emeritus professor of criminology, Lewis Yablonsky, has interviewed
“Tookie” Williams in prison and proposes that
“he…remain in prison and could be a positive force and influence on
young gangsters in the prison community if his sentence was commuted to life
without parole.”
Any of the front-line street workers attempting to prevent gang violence will
tell you the same thing if they are asked. In particular, I ask that you review
the letter of Donald Bakeer, a former teacher and an author, who has written
about the Crips’ world for many years,
Before a decision is reached, Governor, may I suggest you invite a diverse
panel – those actually trying to end gang violence everyday in LA - to
share with you the value of keeping someone like “Tookie” Williams
alive for another two decades of peace work compared with executing him on the
eve of Christmas. I also suggest that you meet with Jamie Foxx privately to understand
his insights into “Tookie” Williams
character when he was preparing for playing his role in the Fx film
“Redemption.”
Thank you for your consideration of this letter. If I can be of further
service, I am always available.
Sincerely,
TOM HAYDEN |
Tom Hayden is national co-director of No More Sweatshops!, a coalition of labor, clergy, community and campus advocates of "sweat-free" guidelines on public procurement and enforceable labor standards for corporate behavior.
