Georgia Should Not Execute Atlanta Spa Shooter

Georgia Should Not Execute Atlanta Spa Shooter Robert Long and Instead Abolish the Death Penalty Altogether

Two months ago, on March 17, 2021, Robert Long opened fire in three separate spas, killing eight people. Six were Asian women.

Ten days later, I attended a Stop Asian Hate walkout on my college campus, where I chanted the names of the eight women who died. When I thought about this anti-Asian and misogynistic attack, I felt shaken and mournful.

However, I believe that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should not seek the death penalty against Long. Instead, the Georgia Legislature should abolish the death penalty altogether.

In capital cases, jurors are being pressured to focus more on emotions rather than evidence or reason. For the past 30 years, since Payne v. Tennessee in 1991, the Supreme Court has allowed victim-impact statements in capital trials. Victim-impact statements are full of grief, anger, and a demand for revenge. Juries must both acknowledge these emotions while also trying to make an impersonal judgment about the defendant's wrongdoing. According to Justice Powell, these statements create a substantial risk of prejudice. Justice Stevens argues that they only encourage jurors to decide in favor of death on a basis of emotions instead of reason.

Emotions are subjective and not felt equally. Psychology researchers found that an angry or outraged juror may not consider all of the evidence, which can lead to capricious judgments. They predicted that an angered juror might evaluate the defendant less positively. Therefore, when juries listen extensively to the victim and community’s anger, they may be more likely to put the perpetrator to death despite the evidence.

Juries at Long’s trial will see large amounts of grief and anger because the entire nation is aware of the shooting. We saw this with the famous Oklahoma City bombing capital case, where an enraged community entered and influenced the courtroom. Many who voiced that McVeigh be executed cited revenge as their motivation. During the penalty phase, dozens of witnesses and victims were allowed to speak of their horror and grief. When the jury gave McVeigh the death sentence, President Clinton said that this day was meant for the survivors and families of those who died, placing the focus of the punishment on retribution. The case revolved around emotion and revenge.

Many people around the country have an emotional connection to the case in Atlanta. Since March of 2020, the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, Stop AAPI Hate has received 6,603 reports of anti-Asian hate incidents. Roughly half of those cases were recorded in just March of this year, the same month as the spa shootings. This targeted shooting occurred at the apex of mass anti-Asian aggression and violence when people are feeling most upset.

The community may demand that the jury choose death, but they are not the ones responsible for the decision. People have changed their views on capital punishment once they became jurors. In Gross v. State, all of the jurors originally believed that some people deserved to die but ended up sparing Gross’s life. As one juror said, “Until you’re put in the hot seat, you don’t know how you’ll act.” Not only are jurors responding to emotions of the community rather than evidence, but they are being pressured by a group of people who may have less harsh views if they are put in the jury’s position.

This collective passion, anger, and outrage cannot enter a courtroom. A courtroom, according to Professor Austin Sarat, is a “temple of reason.” Passion of this level threatens to undermine law.

In 2020 and 2021 we saw major movements for the advancement of racial justice. Those seeking justice for George Floyd’s death were granted a large sigh of relief when the jury found Derek Chauvin guilty on all three counts of murder. Chauvin will receive many years in prison. Those wishing the harshest punishment upon Robert Long, on the other hand, will have to wish for his death according to Georgia law. The death penalty is becoming increasingly unpopular among democratic nations and American citizens. And yet so is racism. If the jury grants Long anything less than death, then they will announce to the world that this terrifying hate crime is not worthy of the harshest punishment. The jury is now forced to make a unique choice: reject capital punishment, or denounce racism.

No matter what sort of punishment Long deserves for his attack -and it should be a serious one- we cannot use a method of punishment that undermines the integrity of the legal system and government as a reasoning institution. We should abolish the death penalty altogether so that it is no longer an option for anyone.

I am enraged by the violence Asians and Asian Americans have faced this year. However, I would not put these emotions in a courtroom. Neither should Fani Willis.

This post was taken from a school paper, originally written in May 2021