[Brandon Astor Jones' regular Looking Out column is being omitted this week so that we can bring readers the following account of his trial, written by one of Brandon's correspondents, DIANE POST.]
On September 23, I was present in courtroom "R" of the Superior Court in Cobb county, Georgia, when the jury handed down the penalty of death in the resentencing trial of Brandon Jones. I cannot begin to describe the emotions this triggered for those of us who know Jones (really know him). Words that come to mind are devastation, grief, anger, dread, despair, loss and disbelief.
Eighteen years ago Jones, admittedly, made the most thoughtless, most dreadful decision of his life when he agreed to participate with another man in armed robbery. The store owner was shot and killed. This was dreadful.
Within three months of the crime, Jones had been tried, convicted and sentenced to death. His sentence was eventually annulled by the Supreme Court. Thus he was finally back in court for a resentencing trial.
The jury had been instructed to reach a unanimous verdict, for life imprisonment or the death penalty. They were not told that if they failed to reach a verdict, Jones would get a life sentence, and it is impossible to know if any of them were aware of this.
After three days of deliberating, the jury informed the judge that they were deadlocked, because one member was holding out for a life sentence. The judge sent them back to the jury room and instructed them to keep trying to reach a unanimous verdict.
One of the defence attorneys explained that it would certainly be psychologically brutal for the one jury member who was still holding out. Too brutal for this individual — two hours later the jury returned to the courtroom with a death sentence.
Kill, kill, kill — is it a mania in Cobb County, Georgia? Perhaps that is unfair, but this is my response to seeing a jury give a death sentence to a man who has very clearly become a changed person — a "rehabilitated" person, as many would describe him — a man for whom the evidence of his shooting is questionable, a man who has suffered daily during more than 17 years on Georgia's death row with the remorse of knowing he had agreed to participate in an act that resulted in the death of a fellow human being.
I learned afterward, from one of the defence lawyers, that neither the prosecutor nor the judge had expected the jury to hand Jones a death sentence.
Five of Jones' friends (myself and two others from the US, one from Australia and one from Britain) testified as character witnesses. We spoke of how much Jones contributes to the lives of people in various parts of the world through his letters and articles; of how he has affected our own lives and of how much we value him as a human being.
In the cross-examination, the prosecution tried to stress that Jones' pen friends were "liberal", anti-death penalty, didn't really know him, and that we had given Jones money. Jones' four children also testified.
The witnesses swore or affirmed to tell the truth. The attorneys were allowed to say almost anything they wanted: truths, untruths, exaggerations, possibilities — even absurdities.
When the prosecutor gave his closing argument, he claimed that the evidence showed that Jones was directly involved in the murder and that this had included torture (which was not true); that Jones was someone who would write to "anyone and everyone on the internet"; that he had shown no remorse, and if he were ever freed he would kill again.
The prosecutor's frequent derogatory references to the internet were intended to give the impression that Jones was using the internet to solicit supporters all over the world. He wanted the jury to believe that this meant Jones had some special kind of power and had used that power for unscrupulous purposes.
In reality, Jones has never used the internet. He has been in prison for the last 18 years, and there are no computers in Georgia's prisons — only pens and pencils, paper and carbon paper, envelopes and stamps — all of which prisoners must purchase — and, on death row, two 10- minute, collect phone calls per month to pre-approved numbers. That's it.
So how did Jones' published essays and poetry get onto the world wide web? That is the truth. But the prosecuting attorneys didn't ask this of those who knew. They were trying to get Jones killed, which was more important to them than the truth.
The prosecutor also claimed (repeatedly and with ardour) that Jones had no remorse. During the presentation of the evidence, the question of remorse had not been mentioned one way or the other.
In fact, over the last 18 years, Jones had always wanted to express his deep remorse to the family members of the victim, but didn't because he had been advised by his various lawyers not to do so. But, again, the prosecuting attorneys did not want the truth. They wanted the death penalty.
Jones' attorney pointed out that the evidence did not prove that Jones was the killer, and that there was plenty of evidence to suggest that the co-defendant had been the main instigator of the crime. He also argued that Jones was now a changed man, and he begged for Mr. Jones' life on the basis of the person he has become.
Is not life imprisonment enough? Why is it deemed necessary to kill Jones? Retaliation? Vengeance? Hate? Fear? Because the store owner died as an innocent victim, and his daughter, wife and others, suffered a dreadful loss, should we inflict such tragedy on Jones' own children and grandchildren?
"But we're afraid that he'll get out on parole", worried at least one member of the jury, in the question the jury sent to the judge during its deliberation.
I would have liked to ask the members of the jury: Do you think that if Jones ever did get released on parole, that he would go about killing? Do you think that he would be abandoned and alone in Georgia, when so many friends appeared in court beside him? Do you think that you are the parole board as well as the jury? So you concluded that it's best to kill him. Just in case.
Jones will now be assigned a different pair of court appointed lawyers and they will begin another round of appeals. If the appeals prevail, there could be a new trial. If not, Jones will be killed by the state of Georgia.
The insanity of this process really struck me. Everything associated with the death penalty is dehumanising: from the solemnity and ritualistic proceedings in the courtroom to the cruel, hateful treatment of the prisoner the minute the death sentence was handed down. This is to say nothing of racism, economic depravity and the other well-known injustices associated with it.
Thus I have witnessed just one aspect of the barbaric inhumanity of the penalty of death.
[Editor's note: Brandon's appeal will be heard first by Judge Nix, who conducted the trial. Readers may be able to help him reach a decision by writing short, courteous letters emphasising the humanity revealed in Brandon's columns, the contribution he has been able to make to society from death row and how his execution might affect them. (Do not argue against capital punishment in general, as this is not considered relevant in Georgia law.)Letters should be sent to: Judge Ken Nix, Superior Court, Cobb County, Marietta, GA 30060, USA. Please send copies to Australians Against Executions, PO Box 640, Milson's Point NSW 2061, fax (02) 9427 9489. Funds for legal expenses are also badly needed. Cheques can be made payable to "Brandon Astor Jones Defence Fund" and sent to Australians Against Executions.]