U.S. will not seek death penalty for Snowden, attorney general says
Why would this even be question? Aside from the Rosenbergs, I can’t think of any Soviet spies executed by the US, giving them lengthy prison sentences instead. Yet, the Soviet Union had no such reservations. So, why doesn’t the U.S. execute spies anymore, such as Aldrich Ames? You think it would help discourage espionage.
In the case of Ames, he provided them with info and may still be that makes him more valuable alive than dead. In the case of Snowden, it’s part of the extradition agreement. Most places will only send him back if we stipulate that we won’t execute him.
I’ll go out on a limb and say that since the horrors of WWII most of the Christian West has soured on the death penalty in general. I don’t think it’s still practiced anywhere in Europe, and even here in the US it’s still decided on a state by state basis (though the majority of US States ***do *have it). Also treason is a very ‘olde timey’ type of crime, like fornication or adultery, two things which have not been criminal acts at all in the West for a long time.
Treason is also very much a political crime, so unless other heinous acts are committed along with it (like directly causing the deaths of US soldiers or citizens for example) Americans are not crazy about executing people for their political views (even when it’s clearly not as simply as that). Serial child murderers can often sit on death row for decades, so how much outrage or ‘blood-lust’ do you think the public will muster for traitors…
The death penalty is in force throughout the United States, not just in certain states. The federal government has the death penalty for several crimes, meaning it is in force anywhere in the US.
There has never been any evidence that the death penalty has a deterrent effect.
In two-third of the states of the U.S. the death penalty either doesn’t exist, hasn’t been used for a long time, or is very rarely used. The other one-third of the states account for nearly all the uses of the death penalty. The federal government very seldom uses the death penalty. Furthermore, the number of people executed each year in the U.S. has slowly dropped since 1999. After the halt in uses of the death penalty between 1966 and 1976, the number of uses rose until 1999 and has dropped since then.
Even in the U.S. then, the death penalty is rarely used and basically only for crimes against the state, not the federal government, and only in a small set of states. And, of course, the death penalty is only used in a small set of countries outside the U.S. Please note that I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS HERE. I am not making any statement about whether this is good or bad. I am not making any statement about whether the death penalty should or shouldn’t exist. I want to say this because the last time I talked about the numbers someone decided that I was offering an opinion about whether the death penalty is right or not. I’m only talking about the numbers.
It’s basically a political stance. I don’t know that we’ve executed anyone at the Federal level for espionage/sabotage not resulting in direct deaths since the Rosenberg case. Ames would have been a good candidate for the death penalty, especially since he was actually turning in double agents, several of whom were summarily put to death in the Soviet Union because of him. But as has been mentioned he was able to be of more value alive and successfully negotiated a life imprisonment plea.
I also find it strange unlike guys such as Hanssen, Ames is serving his sentence at USP Allenwood in Pennsylvania, instead of ADX Florence.
I don’t think procedurally you will see any Federal or State executions for any crimes that aren’t murder-related (either direct murder, or “terrorism resulting in death” or similar.) I don’t think the DOJ will go for that nor do I think States want that either.
It’s worth mentioning that after Kennedy v. Louisiana it is unconstitutional to have the death penalty for crimes that don’t result in the death of the victim except when dealing with high crimes against the State. So Louisiana, the last State (I believe) to have capital punishment for rape (in their case for child rape of a child under 12) is not allowed to execute people for that any longer. But there is no constitutional bar to executions for espionage, treason, sabotage etc.
In the modern era executing people along with a long messy trial would be counterproductive compared to locking them up where they will be forgotten by most people, and unprotested.
As a moral nation America chooses a more nuanced policy.
At the Aspen Summit this month:
John Ashcroft, the former Attorney General who prosecuted the war on terror under the administration of George W. Bush, appeared at Aspen as a board member of Academi. Responding to a question about U.S. over-reliance on the “kinetic” approach of drone strikes and special forces, Ashcroft reminded the audience that the U.S. also likes to torture terror suspects, not just “exterminate” them.
“It’s not true that we have relied solely on the kinetic option,” Ashcroft insisted. “We wouldn’t have so many detainees if we’d relied on the ability to exterminate people…We’ve had a blended and nuanced approach and for the guy who’s on the other end of a Hellfire missile he doesn’t see that as a nuance.”
Hearty laughs erupted from the crowd and fellow panelists. With a broad smile on her face, moderator Catherine Herridge of Fox News joked to Ashcroft, “You have a way with words.”
But Ashcroft was not done. He proceeded to boast about the pain inflicted on detainees during long CIA torture sessions: “And maybe there are people who wish they were on the end of one of those missiles.”
Alternet
There’s no way you can torture the wicked for long time masturbatory gratification if you just kill them.
Leaving open whether or not he should properly be considered a traitor, it does not seem to me that the word “spy” appropriately describes Snowden at all.
The certainty of punishment, not the severity, is the deterrent. I agree with your statement in general, but I’m sure there are numerous specifics where the possibility of capital punishment deterred someone from their evil ways.
For purposes of Federal law espionage is defined by the U.S. Code, and two of the charges against Snowden are 18 U.S.C. 793(d) and 18 U.S.C. 798(a)(3). Whether he should be called a “spy” is up for debate, but there’s definitely strong evidence he violated those two statutes, both of which are under the espionage statutes. 793 specifically is part of the 1917 Espionage Act and 798 was added in the 50s, so these are definitely espionage laws that Snowden is likely guilty of considering he’s never denied the allegations against him.
No study has ever been able to establish that.
Doesn’t change the fact that the United States as a nation is a death penalty country. Anywhere you go in the US, you are potentially liable for the death penalty if you commit certain crimes.
Both pieces of information are relevant in understanding both the legal system and capital punishment in the United States. The Federal government’s legal jurisdiction covers the whole United States but is limited to areas in which the Federal government may constitutionally be involved in criminal matters. Whereas the State’s respective legal jurisdictions are limited to their borders, but aside from State and Federal constitutional protections are unlimited in the scope of crimes they can deal with.
Since I believe all of the executions carried out since we started executions again in the 70s have been for murder, and murder is almost always a State crime, almost all executions have been State executions.
I’m really tired, but to address the OP’s question, we did execute spies: Julius & Ethel Rosenberg five years after WWII.
Considering that the OP referenced that in the second sentence of their post, we can assume that they were aware of that.
Northern Piper writes:
> Anywhere you go in the US, you are potentially liable for the death penalty if
> you commit certain crimes.
Again, I’m talking about numbers. Unless you commit murder in one of a small set of states, in the U.S. you’re far, far more likely to be killed by being struck by lightning than be executed. In fact, you’re more likely to be killed by being eaten by a shark (and you can look up just how excruciatingly rare that is). Anything is possible. While you’re in Canada, you could be killed by eating a poutine that’s been poisoned, or you could be hit in the head by a puck at a hockey game and die, or you could knocked down and trampled by a mountie’s horse and die, or your car could run into a moose and you could die in the accident, or . . . or . . um, I’ve run out of stupid Canadian stereotypes. Please hold off on the stupid American stereotypes. The fact remains that, outside of being charged with murder in a small set of states, execution in the U.S. is rare.
Belarus, although it’s not exactly the most democratic country.
It is a fact that certainty and immediacy deter crime more than “oh, we may kill/imprison you. Some day. In the future. Or maybe not.” I’m not sure if that relates to capital punishment. California’s death penalty fails on both accounts. I do know that yes, capital punishment is not usually considered a punishment scientifically. Although I believe that many criminals are deterred from say, shooting the 7-11 clerk when all they would get so far is a few years for armed robbery.
18 states have no death penalty at all. But it’s not quite true to say that federal punishment hangs over criminals in every state. It normally only involves specific crimes like treason, drug lording, and yes, espionage. But all types of murder doesn’t become a federal case except in specific circumstances. It is unclear whether Snowden’s actions, if considered guilty, fall under traditional espionage (for whom?). But the case can be made.
I don’t know the answer, but I’d say Ames should have been executed. His actions led to the death of others.
There’s no evidence it has ever worked like that; if anything the death penalty has a history of encouraging crime. Murder rates are slightly higher in death penalty states for example. And “certainty of punishment” is nearly impossible anyway; few people commit crimes assuming they’ll get caught.