Brenton Harrison Tarrant, a twenty-nine year old Australian white supremacist stood shackled in a New Zealand court while a judge pronounced sentence for the murder of fifty-one Muslim worshippers gunned down while in prayer at two New Zealand Mosques.
The judge decreed that Tarrant will spend the rest of his life behind bars and no clemency by way of parole will apply. Tarrant finally entered a guilty plea to fifty-one counts of murder, forty counts of attempted murder and one count of terrorism. His guilty pleas saved the survivors the ordeal of giving evidence.
That sentence was the harshest possible under the laws in place in New Zealand. Australia and New Zealand have both abolished the death penalty and replaced it with something worse. Tarrant will spend years rotting away in a small cell, protected from other prisoners who will try and do him harm. If he is not insane now, he certainly will be by the time his life eventually ends by natural causes.
Many citizens here and in New Zealand will view that sentence with satisfaction. It contains a " revenge " element for a crime that shocked the world. Not only did Tarrant hold white supremacist views, he also loathed the Muslim religion and carefully planned this massacre knowing that men, women and children would be involved.
The main objection to the death penalty was the thought that an innocent person might be found guilty and be executed before evidence emerged that proved innocence. That certainly can happen with the ever widening scope of forensic science, but there is no doubt about Tarrant's guilt. There is every chance that he may live another sixty years and that will impose an astronomical burden on the public purse. There is debate on whether the sentence should be served in New Zealand, the home of the crime or in Australia from which he originated.
In earlier times, public executions were a social event. Crowds gathered to see murderers swing on the end of a rope and for the most heinous crimes the guilty bore the indignity of being " hung, drawn and quartered ". When that was thought to be too grisly for public view, executions took place within prison yards and the remains were buried in unmarked graves.
We condemn the use of torture, and yet Tarrant is to be subjected to a form of torture by the very nature of the sentence handed down. Her will spent twenty-three hours of every day locked away without company in a small cell to which meals will be served. For one hour he will have access to a closed exercise yard and at all times he will be electronically monitored.
Years ago, " Katingal " was closed in Sydney because it was described in an enquiry into prisons as an " electronic zoo " that did little to enhance rehabilitation from crime. There is no thought of rehabilitation in the sentence handed down to Tarrant. It is the worst kind of retribution available to the sentencing judge and deprivation of liberty for the remains of his lifetime is now an unusual form of punishment reserved for crimes that deserve the death penalty.
It could be argued that such life terms are more of a punishment on the taxpayers who have to foot the bill for life internment. Perhaps now would be a good time to re-examine all aspects of crime and punishment. Our death penalty rejection might not stand up to scrutiny as the penalty for some of the more gruesome crimes being committed today.
No comments:
Post a Comment