DOC T's LEGAL PAGE

LETTER TO THE TERMINATOR

2006-03-07T07:58:00.000-08:00

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
United States of America

3 March 2006

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

As I previously introduced myself in a letter to you on the Stanley “Tookie” Williams execution, which to date remains unanswered, I will not do so this time but delve straight into the subject of this letter.

Mr. Schwarzenegger, have you ever had a chance to delve deeper into the domestic circumstances, childhood and behavior of every murderer for whom you decline to grant clemency, or is it simply a case of “he/she killed and deserve to die”? Have you ever thought that adverse factors during these times in a person’s life could possibly have contributed to them killing? Have you ever thought that external stimuli could also have contributed to them killing, in such a way that they were virtually “set up” to kill? That they could possibly have been “conditioned” to kill?

Sir, these need to be answered. The reasons will become apparent later on.

Did you know that we all are born with a resistance to killing our own kind?

However, as time goes on, the concept of “killing” someone manifests itself in our psyche through various stimuli. How, Governor Schwarzenegger?

Well, for starters, the media. Is a light going on for you? I’m sure there is, especially if you had to backtrack a few years when you, Governor, wielded the mighty sword of Conan the Barbarian or the multitude of weapons of the Commando and please don’t forget the Terminator!

Yeah, loads and loads of bodies, blood, gore and music, music, music!! Fun, wasn’t it? Or was it?

You see, Governor, the media has an extreme influence on children and adults alike. By means of the violence being portrayed in movies such as yours, children fantasize being Conan chopping people with a sword or the Commando spraying bullet after bullet into living human beings.

And then the video games follow, aptly having the same name as your movies…

But, this is only for starters…
Now, during the showing of these movies, whether on TV or in the cinema, there comes a commercial break and out pops a famous clown and the kid’s favorite foodstuffs are advertised. We know which clown I’m talking about, don’t we?

Now, the kid starts associating his favorite food with your movie. So, next when he visits the big M, he thinks back, either consciously or unconsciously, to your movie. He sees your rage, he feels your anger and he tastes the action in these movies, every time he sees the big M. The power of association kicks in…subliminal association manifests its purpose…

This lingers in him and he goes home. Meanwhile his Dad, who is also a big Arnie fan and also fantasizes about being this strong, macho man, especially if he cannot see his feet anymore, due to an adverse beer-gut, starts mimicking your actions in these movies. After all, you are a role model now, aren’t you? That’s what movies are all about.

He struts around, what’s left of his chest pushed out, slapping everyone around, kicking everyone that tends to disagree with him, in short, he is committing domestic violence (as the legal terms reads). Or is he? Not always. He could also just be trying to bolster a flagging ego by playing a fantasy life, based on your character in Commando, for instance.

He, in this instance, adds to his kid’s “conditioning” by confirming what the kid sees in the movies. The kid now learns to accept this as reality and the God-given resistance to killing starts crumbling. After all, it is OK to kill, the Terminator does it and he is “just like my Dad”. The kid then kills one day and is sentenced to death. His clemency fails and he is executed.

Governor, I know I am picking on you at this stage. I know I should actually be picking on each and every actor, storyteller, author or video game manufacturer that depicts violence. The only reason I am picking on you is because you are a Governor of a very large State and you have the power to do something about this!

You see, this is not the only way kids are conditioned to kill. There is still military training, where soldiers get “broken down” before they are trained to become killers. And when they do come out of war and kill someone in civilian life, they are tried and executed.

Governor, these and many other instances in life, are CONDITIONING people to kill. It is the starting point. Killing is seen to be glamorous with a hype that only the movies or video games can give! Movies depict violence, murder, rape, gangsterism and much more. And the kids love it…and the actor smiles all the way to the bank…

I want to end this letter (it will be the first of many, believe me!) by asking you a few questions:

1. Do you agree that your movies are having and did have an adverse effect on children and that it could possibly be conditioning them to follow your example to, one day, kill someone?

2. What are you doing, now that you are Governor, to safeguard children against the violence your movies have and are glamorizing?

3. Will you accept personal responsibility for this if, one day, it is proven that one of your movies conditioned someone to kill?

Governor, I ask one favor. Please do not patronize me by saying that “parents must take responsibility and not allow their kids to see age-restricted movies”. You and I know that this is nonsense. Moviemakers are very well aware what they are doing. They know that if kids can get to see these movies, they will rake in the money. That is why they advertise it so well. The advertisements have NO age restrictions and once the kid sees the advertisement, he/she will move heaven and earth to see the movie!! After all, the Terminator is famous and kids can’t be watched for 24 hours now, can they?

I do trust that you will, at least, acknowledge receipt of my letter this time, other than the automated receipt I received last time.

Doc T

PS: Don’t you think, if we prove that this could be the cause in a real case one day, that the actor and moviemakers can then rather be considered for execution? Nah, let’s rather just abolish the death penalty!

Murder or Domestic Abuse? You be the Judge!

2006-02-22T09:33:00.000-08:00

Any abusive, violent, coercive, forceful, or threatening act or word inflicted by one member of a family or household on another can constitute domestic violence.

Domestic violence, once considered one of the most underreported crimes, became more widely recognized during the 1980s and 1990s. During this time, law enforcement and mental health professionals grappled with the severity, complexity, and prevalence of the problem.Various individuals and groups have defined domestic violence to include everything from saying unkind or demeaning words, to grabbing a person's arm, to hitting, kicking, choking, or murdering.

Domestic violence most often refers to violence between married or cohabiting couples, although it sometimes refers to violence against other members of a household, such as children or elderly relatives. It occurs in every racial, socioeconomic, ethnic, and religious group, although conditions such as poverty, drug or alcohol abuse, and mental illness increase its likelihood.

Those who have studied domestic violence believe that it usually occurs in a cycle with three general stages.FIRST, the abuser uses words or threats, perhaps humiliation or ridicule. NEXT, the abuser explodes at some perceived infraction by the other person, and the abuser's rage is manifested in physical violence. FINALLY, the abuser "cools off," asks forgiveness, and promises the violence will never occur again. At this point, the victim often abandons any attempt to leave the situation or to have charges brought against the abuser, although some prosecutors will go forward with charges even if the victim is unwilling to do so. Typically, the abuser's rage begins to build again after the reconciliation, and the violent cycle is repeated.

In some cases of repeated domestic violence, the victim eventually strikes back and harms or kills the abuser. The following links tell the stories of Anieta Natasha Ferreira and Ann-Marie Engelbrecht, two women from South Africa, who were found guilty for murdering their partners.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20050217080200490C242440

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=qw1108728901599B262

http://www.csvr.org.za/gender/docs/Anita%20Ferreira%201.htm

Both were eventually set free, after receiving either a suspended sentence or, as in Ann-Marie's case, a sentence of only five minutes in jail.

Were their actions justified?

Studies done by the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation in South Africa have proven that, pretty much universally, battered women who kill their partners are denied access to existing legal defences to murder. One of the main reasons for this is the historical EXCLUSION of women's perspectives from these defences. One only has to read the stories of scores of women today in American jails, to know that this holds true. The age-old adage that "a woman is a man's property", gave rise to this notion, which is, to this day, exercised in many religious and ultra-conservative communities. The "submission" rule, you know...

These women killed. They murdered in cold blood. Some planned it (both Anieta and Ann-Marie did), some did it on the spur of the moment. Either way, they took a life.

The questions: "Do they deserve the death penalty or even incarceration for premeditated murder, seeing as the time-frame leading up to the actual murder leaves one enough time to reconsider before killing? Should their defense of a pattern of irrational thought, due to continuous abuse, be taken into account when determining whether they could have turned away before murdering? Is it justifiable for some judges to say that "the woman could have left the spousal home" when the abuse got out of hand?" You be the Judge.

These and MANY MORE questions, concerning women who kill their partners, are still hotly debated in courts today. Meanwhile, many women are sitting in jail, having chosen it's rigours and limitations above that of domestic violence. They chose to kill in order to find FREEDOM. Freedom from abuse!

For those interested in the full studies done by the CSVR (SA), please leave an email address and I will forward it to you.

In the meantime, should you agree that domestic violence has no place in a moral society, please consider supporting the MANY clemency applications currently gathering dust on the desks of Governors of State.

Death of the Death Penalty in South Africa

2006-02-20T11:00:00.000-08:00

"Everyone, including the most abominable of human beings, has the right to life, and capital punishment is therefore unconstitutional."

With these words, Chief Justice P. Chaskalson ensured on 6 June 1995 that the death penalty came to its end in South Africa, a third-world country by many standards. Once the leader in capital executions (one every second day), it became an example to many in including a few words in its Constitution (Bill of Rights Section 11): "Everyone has the right to life".

( the full text of his judgement can be read at http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/uhtbin/hyperion-image/J-CCT3-94)

(the text of the SA Constitution can be read at http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/)

As the years progressed, those sentenced to death before this landmark decision were granted substitute sentences.

(the full text of this judgement can be read at http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/uhtbin/hyperion-image/J-CCT45-04)

South Africa refused to extradite those sought in countries that upheld the death penalty, in this case the State of New York.

(see http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/uhtbin/hyperion-image/S-CCT17-01)

No longer will South Africa seek to murder its people or allow any citizen of another country, who is on SA soil, to be murdered in this way!

Death Row - The Effect on an inmate

2006-02-20T07:30:00.000-08:00

In 1989 Amnesty International made the following comment (Amnesty International (1989). When the state kills … London):

"The cruelty of the death penalty is not restricted to the actual moment of execution. Its unique horror and one which cannot be relieved by developing more "humane" methods of killing is that, from the moment the sentence is pronounced, the prisoner is forced to contemplate the prospect of being taken away to be put to death at an appointed time. "

Johnson, R. (1980). Warehousing for death: Observations on the human environment of death row. Crime & Delinquency, (October) states:

"Death row emerges as an environment in which prisoners feel impotent, afraid and alone, defenceless against their keepers and unable to alter their fate. A few prisoners deteriorate dramatically; all experience, in varying degrees, a living death. This image of death row as a living death symbolises the human environment of death row and the human consequences of confinement in this oppressive penal milieu. (p. 545)"

Johnson (1981) found that prisoners under sentence of death were intensely preoccupied with the thought of execution. They were anxious about how they would behave during the walk to the death chamber, whether they would break down, whether the execution would be painful, and how the memory or image of the execution would affect their families. For many prisoners, these and similar thoughts had become obsessive. Some prisoners had recurring and vivid nightmares in which they went through the execution process step by step.

Vogelman, L. (1989). The living dead: living on death row. South African Journal of Human Rights, 5, 183-195, states:

"Death row is a place whose sole purpose is to preserve those who live there so that they may be executed. While the condemned live there, they are the 'living dead".
Some prisoners also discuss the process of the hanging in detail. One even practised what it would be like: 'I thought maybe I can't breathe. I used to put my hand over my nose and mouth to see what it is like not to have any air when your neck breaks' (Vogelman, 1989, p. 10)."

Johnson observed that the death row prisoner's relationships with family and friends deteriorate because of the prospect of permanent separation, and a sense of the futility of pursuing relationships. These visits are often a cause of terrible anguish. The condemned are particularly concerned about the consequences of their death. They are anxious about being unable to take emotional and financial care of family members, and about the sadness that will be caused by their death. Often there is an attempt to lift the spirits of the other, and sometimes family members insist that hope must not be lost since a stay of execution is still possible. Nevertheless, the day before the execution, the last goodbyes are said. As could be expected, tears, words of love and apology generally characterise the last visit.

Now the question I want to ask is: "How did person's like Stanley Tookie Williams, Vernon Lee Evans and SCORES of other condemned inmates (including the innocent) experience this?"

The next question: "Having had to endure this for so many years, prior to their expected execution date, wasn't it enough punishment? Couldn't this have been taken into account during their clemency applications, in which they truly showed reform?"

The last question: "How did they EVER keep their sanity (some didn't and turned into virtual lunatics!) and STILL continued to reform?"

I think it is time Governors spend some time on Death Row to experience this for themselves and stop withholding clemency for their own political agendas!

The Anti-Death-Penalty Doc

2006-02-19T12:53:00.000-08:00

A few days before the end of last year, whilst on vacation, I visited a small town in the north of the fairest Cape, South Africa. Large headlines proclaimed: "Famous Crips gangster put to death". In it I read the story of how Stanley "Tookie" Williams was put to death by the people of California. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declined his clemency. Tookie maintained his innocence right to his end. His last wish was to have his ashes strewn here in South Africa. He wanted to come home to his roots. Another "African" was coming home...

I sent an email to Governor Schwazenegger, asking him what really motivated his denial of Tookie's clemency, not the "official reply" his legal department compiled FOR him. Needless to say, I never got an answer; only an automated email reply that read: "Your mail will receive attention". It never did.

I then met Vernon on www.meetvernon.blogspot.com. Another "African" on Death Row. To this day, he also maintains his innocence. I sent him a long comment, supporting his drive towards clemency and expressing my joy regarding a stay having been granted. I know he will answer in due course and it will be published on his blog.

Americans, why are you murdering your people? Why do you throw them in little cage-like prison cells on Death Row, forgetting they are also human beings and deserve dignity? Why do you treat them like outcasts whilst their appeals are still pending? Shouldn't you maintain their dignity and human rights until all their appeals and legal remedies have been exhausted and right up to the moment when they pass out of this world, WRONGLY by YOUR hand? Why do you take away their human rights and treat them like animals?

South Africa abolished the Death Penalty more than 10 years ago, when it became a democracy. When our past President, Nelson Mandela was asked: "Why did you abolish the Death Penalty?", he plainly said: "It served no further purpose". Reform took its place.

It is time the world starts sitting up and take heed of the abomination of the Death Penalty. It is time that no coin is left unturned in finding ways to reform those on Death Row. And if reform has no effect, one doesn't have to kill them in a vengeful manner. One can remove them from society until the day of their passing. One would never know if reform would work until one tries. Execution has no place in a society that holds itself to have high moral values.