Skip to main content

Biden said he opposed death penalty. Why do feds want to kill the Buffalo shooter?

President Joseph Biden's stated opposition to the death penalty is running counter to his administration's decision on the fate of the racist who murdered 10 Black people in a Buffalo supermarket in 2022.

"It's really out of synch with what Biden said during his campaign," said Karen Pita Loor, a clinical law professor at Boston University who has written of the Department of Justice's decision to seek the death penalty in another case.

Last month the Justice Department announced it would seek the death penalty for Payton Gendron, who fatally shot 10 people with a semiautomatic rifle at the Buffalo Tops Friendly Market in May 2022. Two others were wounded in the attack.

During his successful 2020 bid for the presidency, Biden said he wanted to abolish the federal death penalty.

His campaign website then said: "Because we cannot ensure we get death penalty cases right every time, Biden will work to pass legislation to eliminate the death penalty at the federal level and incentivize states to follow the federal government’s example. These individuals should instead serve life sentences without probation or parole."

Among the families of the 10 people murdered in May 2022 at the Tops market in Buffalo, there has been a split: Some support Gendron's execution, some don't.

Federal authorities "decided to pursue the death penalty and as a matter of record we all had to submit our wishes to the prosecutors in terms of what we wanted to see happen," said Garnell Whitfield Jr., a Buffalo resident whose mother, Ruth Whitfield, was one of those fatally shot at the Tops.

The trial is now expected for late 2025, and the jury would decide after a guilty verdict whether Gendron should be executed. But the days, weeks and months before will continue to bring heartache for those who lost loved ones.

Garnell Whitfield's sister is traveling from Ohio to Buffalo soon with a sad chore ahead of her.

"Two years removed and we're starting to go through my mother's things," Whitfield said. "It's going to be difficult."

Attorney General Garland's Buffalo shooter decision


Gendron, now 20, has agreed to a life without parole sentence with a guilty plea to the murders in state court. His attorneys have said he would do the same with federal charges.

"As the defense has made clear, without the prospect of the death penalty, Payton Gendron will plead guilty to the Indictment and no trial will be necessary," his federal attorneys wrote in recent court papers.

The Department of Justice and Attorney General Merrick Garland are the decision-makers with death penalty decisions.

The Biden administration and the Justice Department decided against the death penalty in more than 30 cases in which capital punishment was sought by previous administrations, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, which produces research on the death penalty.

And there have been cases in which the administration and the Justice Department allowed cases to continue with a possibility of the death penalty as punishment.

Gendron's crimes, however, occurred in the second year of the Biden administration.

"This is the first case that has been approved for the death penalty by Merrick Garland," said Robin Maher, DPIC's executive director.

Austin Sarat, a political scientist professor at Amherst College who has written extensively of the death penalty, said, "Joe Biden has promised more than he's produced with respect to the America death penalty.

"Biden is the first (death penalty) abolitionist American president to be elected," said Sarat, a death penalty opponent.

Will Buffalo mass killer Payton Gendron face execution?


Even those questioning the decision to seek death for Gendron say they see possible rationales for what could appear to be an about-face by the Biden administration.

Specifically, they say, the reasons could be:
  • A willingness by the president to defer to the Justice Department for the decision. "Garland's own record has been consistently inconsistent," Sarat said. "He has declined to go forward with some cases that were left over from the Trump administration and he has gone forward with others." For instance, Garland decided against seeking the death penalty for Patrick Crusius, who committed the racially motivated Walmart attack in El Paso, Texas, that killed 23 people, and Anderson Aldrich, who killed five in an LGBT hate-motivated attack in the Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
  • A belief that terrorism or hate crimes should be treated differently. The Justice Department has agreed to the death penalty for the Boston Marathon bombing killer and for the man who murdered 11 Jewish people at a Pittsburgh synagogue. "This was a mass shooting with multiple victims, an act of domestic terrorism," Maher said of Gendron's murders. In its papers, federal prosecutors highlighted the racism foundation of Gendron's crimes. However, observers say, this is counter to the decisions in the Crusius and Aldrich cases.
  • A desire to abide by the wishes of the victims in the mass killing. This, however, is not so clear-cut because of the division within that group, a number who think Gendron would suffer more by spending his remaining days in prison.
Terrence Connors, a Buffalo lawyer representing the families of survivors in a civil suit, said there are some supportive and some opposed to the death penalty. A third group, Connors said, is "dismissing (Gendron) as irrelevant."

They have turned their attention to community work and advocacy to try to strengthen their neighborhoods and the surrounding area, Connors said.

Whitfield has opposed the death penalty for Gendron. His bigger focus, Whitfield said, is on the civil suits against online companies that allowed the racist portals where Gendron and others communicated, as well as those responsible for the sale of the firearm and body armor.

"Just by fighting the fight, bringing this suit, it allows the next person to bring another suit and that’s how change happens incrementally over time," Whitfield said.

Why is there a federal execution moratorium?


Whatever the Justice Department decides with criminal cases, there is currently a federal moratorium on executions. Garland initiated the moratorium to study the fairness of federal death penalty cases and the method by which the condemned are to be killed.

"It seems to me not just inconsistent but an academic sort of move to say we're having a moratorium" while seeking the death penalty with some cases, Professor Loor said.

The Justice Department has used the moratorium to review and adjust its internal policies with death penalty decisions, said Maher of the DPIC. What's left to be decided is the methodology for executions, she said.

Numerous studies have shown the death penalty's use across the country to be racially skewed, with Black people more likely to be sentenced to death than white people for similar crimes. There also have been individuals sentenced to death who turned out to be innocent.

Lawyers in the Gendron case predict that jury selection could take several months, followed by more months of trial and then a decision by the jury of whether Gendron should be killed.

In this case, there is no question of Gendron's guilt with the murders, so the trial will largely be a precursor to the jury's deliberations over the death penalty.

Jury selection for the trial is expected to last months, as is the trial itself. Gendron's lawyers also could seek a change of venue, moving the trial away from Buffalo.

Source: democratandchronicle.com, Gary Craig, February 21, 2024


_____________________________________________________________________










SUPPORT DEATH PENALTY NEWS





Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term:   Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight.  In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution.  Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order. 

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

Alabama | Judge bars nitrogen gas execution, says method is unconstitutionally cruel

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A federal judge on Tuesday permanently blocked Alabama from executing an inmate with nitrogen gas after declaring it violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. District Judge Emily Marks issued the ruling hours after an appeals court reversed her initial finding that the method was constitutional. Marks permanently enjoined the state from executing Jeffrey Lee, 49, by nitrogen gas. He was scheduled to be executed Thursday. The decision, for now, blocks the use of the controversial new execution method that the state has championed since 2024, but the issue will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Idaho will soon turn to firing squad executions. Police will pull the triggers

Trained members of Idaho law enforcement with demonstrated firearms proficiency are expected to fill slots for carrying out the death penalty by firing squad as the state prison system transitions to the controversial execution method next month.  Six volunteers certified for no less than three years apiece through Peace Officer Standards and Training, or POST, will be recruited to ensure the Idaho Department of Correction is ready to comply with a state law that prioritizes shooting prisoners to death over lethal injection starting July 1.  No one on the team may have faced disciplinary action over firearms, use of force, or related conduct over the prior year, according to new execution protocols the prison system released this week. 

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.