ProDPinNC: RENNY CUSHING DEAD WRONG: THE DEATH PENALTY

RENNY CUSHING DEAD WRONG: THE DEATH PENALTY

From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

NOTE: Cushing was a long time New Hampshire State Representative and anti- death penalty activist, who successfully led the repeal of their death penalty law, in 2019, after decades of effort.

I fought Renny Cushing's anti-death penalty efforts, with these in mind, all of which Cushing knew of, from my opposing efforts in NH, as did the NH media.

What prompted this response was a re -publishing, in 2022, of Cushing's 2010 op/ed (1).

Cushing's two murders, within his family, were used, by him, as a moral high ground from which to assail the death penalty. I am very sorry for those murders, as with all.

Neither of the murderers was subject to the death penalty, which is, clearly, important. He should have told everyone, always, those murders were not death penalty eligible. He didn't, just as within this article (1).

The cruelty of Cushing's anti-death penalty efforts is that Cushing got a maximum sentence, life, with his father's murder, but Cushing's goal was to deny that same opportunity for other survivors, to deny them the maximum sentence in their capital death penalty eligible cases (2).

It is a, particularly, cruel way for a victim survivor to treat other victim survivors (2), when Cushing could have been gracious and thoughtful enough to say: "I respect your right to choose the most just sanction for your loved one's murder, even though I, personally, oppose the death penalty."

He would not.

Cushing fought against other survivors.

Non-scientific polling, finds that 95-99% of those whose loved ones were murdered (3) in a capital, death penalty eligible murder, support the death penalty/execution, highly believable, when 81% of US voters supported, across all demographics (3), the execution of Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber/mass murderer and when 86% of Americans, "sometimes", support the death penalty (3).

Innocents are protected, better, in three ways (4), with the death penalty, than with life without parole: Enhanced due process, enhanced incapacitation and enhanced deterrence (4), therefore, death penalty abolition means more innocent deaths.

Cushing stated: "I do not believe the needs of crime victims, or their survivors are met by killing the killers."

Cushing decided that he knew, better, the needs of other survivors, more than they did. The hubris of it is, simply, astounding.

Then we have the sad "killing the killers", an amoral or immoral equating of murder and execution, innocent victims and their guilty murderers, an unfortunate anti- death penalty staple.

Cushing said, within the NH House: “If we let those who murder turn us to murder, it gives over more power to those who do evil. We become what we say we abhor. I do not want the state of New Hampshire to do to the man who murdered my father what that man did to my family.” (5).

Cushing is stating that there is no difference between the murders of innocents and the execution of their guilty murderers.

It's a classic anti-death penalty horror, equating actions, without any moral compass, the same as equating incarceration and kidnapping, fines and theft, community service and slavery, making love and rape, etc.

It is, simply, sadly, amoral horror.

Cushing falsely stated: "I recognize and respect the diversity of opinions about capital punishment among survivors of murder victims."

Cushing found his belief to be superior to the belief of other survivors, to the extent that he would end their choice. That was his respect, which was no respect at all.

Cushing complained about "our broken capital-punishment system", but cared not about looking for solutions, even though he knew they were right in front of us all: Since 1976, Virginia has executed 113 murderers, within 7 years of appeals, on average. For decades, Cushing never tried to fix it, because the worse the better, for him.

Cushing states executions do not bring back our murdered loved ones, as if anyone thought that bit of idiocy, other than the normal bit of anti-death penalty nonsense. It shows more disrespect.

Somehow, Cushing avoided that many find the death penalty to be justice, which Cushing denies to others.

Another false argument by Cushing was this: "For any person, the worst murder is the murder of a family member. A system that purports to execute only those who commit heinous murders creates a hierarchy of victims."

Legally, ethically and morally, Cushing knew this was complete utter nonsense, lacking all reason and reality, as if all rapes and murders should have the exact same sentence, with zero considerations of circumstance, an obvious affront to the law and . . . simply, another ludicrous anti-death penalty talking point . . . more disrespect.

Did Cushing, ever, try to pass a law which made every sanction equal, for each crime category? Of course not. It was just a talking point, with zero respect. He knew it had no reason nor reality. He used it, anyway.

Laura Briggs, the widow of murdered police officer Michael Briggs, pleaded with Cushing not to take the death penalty away from her husband's murderer.

Cushing celebrated doing just that.

I agree with Cushing's "that we must do better by victims of violent crime." I wish that he had.

Postscript

As a rule, journalists avoided fact checking and critical thinking these issues or they, intentionally, left them out, as has become the norm with many journalists for many issues, as per (6).

1) originally published 2010

RE: ‘Why the death penalty should die’ Renny Cushing’s decades-long battle to abolish capital punishment, re published March 10, 2022 NHBR Staff