Ten years. For 10 years, Ray Krone was a victim of our justice system. For 10 years, Ray Krone served time on death row and in an Arizona state prison for a murder he did not commit. “For 10 years, I felt less than human,” Ray Krone told my Death Penalty in America class this past Tuesday. 

I have never really held a concrete view on the death penalty. For the most part, I have avoided committing either complete support or complete opposition to capital sentencing. If someone like Adolph Hitler or Osama bin Laden were ever put on trial, I would have no reservations about sentencing them to death. More realistically, I doubt I would have any significant qualms about sentencing a multi-victim murderer/rapist to death. In my mind, capital sentencing should be used for only “the worst of the worst” and most “heinous and atrocious” crimes. This principle is also how our current capital sentencing scheme works, or at least how it is supposed to work in theory. 

Growing up in New York, which has not carried out an execution since 1976 and currently has a court-ordered moratorium on capital sentencing, my exposure to actual death penalty cases has been rather limited. Despite the occasional highly publicized national case (such as the case involving Scott Peterson’s murder of his pregnant wife) I never really had any personal exposure or reason to be directly interest in capital sentencing. My general belief that the State should not have the power to determine who lives and dies, coupled with my admitted acceptance of the death penalty in extreme circumstances, was largely a result of longstanding moral beliefs and hypothetical speculation.

Taking The Death Penalty in America, a class taught at the Cornell Law School, my knowledge and understanding of capital crimes and sentencing in the United States expanded dramatically. Unlike my belief that the death penalty was reserved for only the most despicable and atrocious murders, I discovered that there are many states where individuals are sentenced to death for accidental murders that happen to occur in the act of committing a felony. Even more shocking, I learned that in states likeTexas someone can be sentenced to death for acting as an accomplice to murder, even if they themselves did not commit the crime. Becoming aware of the leniency and frequency in which some states use the death penalty, in addition to the racial and prejudicial problems that have historically plagued capital cases, my opinion on the death penalty became even less concrete. 

Before witnessing Krone’s guest lecture, I anticipated that his appearance could lead me to question my opinion on the death penalty. It would be naïve to expect that such a unique and emotional firsthand experience would have no impact on my beliefs. Beyond my expectations, staring face to face with Ray Krone, listening to his story about how he had over 10 years of his life taken away from him, I began to question why I felt the way I did about the death penalty. Had you heard Krone detail the inaccurate “bite mark evidence” that was used to convict him, the relentless efforts of an Arizona prosecutor to sentence him to death even when expert testimony was proven flat out wrong, and the tedious 10 years of procedural bureaucracy that kept him innocently imprisoned, you would question your beliefs as well.

I am still uncertain exactly where I stand in either support or opposition to the death penalty. As a whole, the issue is much more complex than the obviously enormous injustice that occurs when an innocent person is imprisoned or executed.  Economic issues, safety issues, mental health issues and moral issues all complicate my efforts to come to a distinct and absolute conclusion. Nonetheless, listening to Krone had a definite impact moving me closer to complete opposition to the death penalty.

Regardless of your position on the death penalty, which was certainly the main focus of the lecture, Krone also had a deeper message. Krone sternly said that “we all tend to have beliefs that are a mile wide but only an inch deep.” Urging the class to spend more time examining why we hold the beliefs we do, I realized that his assertion was overwhelmingly true. 

Personal experiences likely have the greatest impact in shaping our core beliefs. However, when it comes to complex and controversial issues such as gay marriage, abortion and the death penalty, most of us have little direct personal experience. As a result, we tend to let secondary sources, such as The New York Times, Fox News and even Twitter somewhat significantly reinforce or curtail our beliefs. This phenomenon has increased the polarization in American and the expansion of beliefs that are “a mile wide.”

As I near graduation and the next phase of my life, I am trying to understand why I hold the convictions I do and whether they are based on any substantial reasoning. Last Tuesday, I was further convinced to re-examine some of my beliefs that were “only an inch thick.” It would be beneficial if we all took this advice, which came from a man who unnecessarily spent over 10 years questioning his. 

Shaun Werbelow is a senior in the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. He may be contacted at swerbelow@cornellsun.com. Second Opinion appears alternate Fridays this semester.