Fa dues setmanes, estava assegut a la taula de la cuina amb la meva dona Katya, i estàvem parlant sobre el que parlaria avui. Tenim un fill d'onze anys, que es diu Lincoln. Estava assegut a la mateixa taula, fent els deures de mates. I durant una pausa en la conversa amb la Katya, vaig fer una ullada a en Lincoln i de sobte em vaig quedar paralitzat pel record d'un dels meus clients.
Two weeks ago, I was sitting at the kitchen table with my wife Katya, and we were talking about what I was going to talk about today. We have an 11-year-old son; his name is Lincoln. He was sitting at the same table, doing his math homework. And during a pause in my conversation with Katya, I looked over at Lincoln and I was suddenly thunderstruck by a recollection of a client of mine.
El meu client era un paio que es deia Will. Era del nord de Texas. Mai no conegué massa el seu pare, perquè abandonà la seva mare quan estava embarassada d'ell. Així que, estava destinat a ser criat per una mare soltera, que podria haver estat bé, excepte que aquesta mare soltera era paranoica esquizofrènica, i quan en Will tenia cinc anys, l'intentà matar amb un ganivet.
My client was a guy named Will. He was from North Texas. He never knew his father very well, because his father left his mom while she was pregnant with him. And so, he was destined to be raised by a single mom, which might have been all right except that this particular single mom was a paranoid schizophrenic, and when Will was five years old, she tried to kill him with a butcher knife.
Fou internada en un hospital psquiàtric per les autoritats, i per això els propers anys en Will visqué amb el seu germà gran, fins que aquest se suïcidà d'un tret al cor. I després, en Will passà de mans d'un parent a un altre, fins que, quan tenia nou anys, vivia bàsicament sol.
She was taken away by authorities and placed in a psychiatric hospital, and so for the next several years Will lived with his older brother, until he committed suicide by shooting himself through the heart. And after that Will bounced around from one family member to another, until, by the time he was nine years old, he was essentially living on his own.
Aquell matí que estava amb la Katya i en Lincoln, vaig mirar-me el meu fill i em vaig adonar que quan en Will tenia la seva edat, ja feia dos anys que vivia sol. Amb el temps, en Will s'uní a una banda i cometé una sèrie de crims molt greus, incloient-hi el més greu de tots, un assassinat horrible i tràgic. I al final en Will fou executat, com a càstig per aquell crim.
That morning that I was sitting with Katya and Lincoln, I looked at my son, and I realized that when my client, Will, was his age, he'd been living by himself for two years. Will eventually joined a gang and committed a number of very serious crimes, including, most seriously of all, a horrible, tragic murder. And Will was ultimately executed as punishment for that crime.
Però avui no vull parlar sobre la moralitat de la pena de mort. Per a mi, el meu client no hauria d'haver estat executat, però el que voldria fer avui en comptes d'això, és parlar de la pena de mort d'una forma en què no he fet mai, d'una manera que no és gens controvertida.¶
But I don't want to talk today about the morality of capital punishment. I certainly think that my client shouldn't have been executed, but what I would like to do today instead is talk about the death penalty in a way I've never done before, in a way that is entirely noncontroversial.
Penso que és possible, perquè hi ha un punt en el debat sobre la pena de mort −potser el punt més important− en què tothom està d'acord, en què els defensors més apassionats de la pena de mort i els abolicionistes més vehements comparteixen opinió. I és aquest el punt que vull explorar.
I think that's possible, because there is a corner of the death penalty debate -- maybe the most important corner -- where everybody agrees, where the most ardent death penalty supporters and the most vociferous abolitionists are on exactly the same page. That's the corner I want to explore.
Abans de fer-ho, però, vull passar un parell de minuts explicant-vos el patró d'un cas de pena de mort, i després vull explicar-vos les dues lliçons que he après en 20 anys fent d'advocat a través de l'observació acurada de més de 100 casos amb aquest patró.
Before I do that, though, I want to spend a couple of minutes telling you how a death penalty case unfolds, and then I want to tell you two lessons that I have learned over the last 20 years as a death penalty lawyer from watching well more than a hundred cases unfold in this way.
Penseu en un cas de pena de mort com una història amb 4 capítols. El primer capítol de cada cas és exactament el mateix, i és tràgic. Comença amb l'assassinat d'un ésser humà innocent, i el segueix un judici en què l'assassí és condemnat a mort i la sentència és ratificada després pel tribunal d'apel·lacions estatal.
You can think of a death penalty case as a story that has four chapters. The first chapter of every case is exactly the same, and it is tragic. It begins with the murder of an innocent human being, and it's followed by a trial where the murderer is convicted and sent to death row, and that death sentence is ultimately upheld by the state appellate court.
El segon capítol consisteix en un procediment legal complexe: l'apel·lació habeas corpus estatal. El tercer capítol és un procediment legal encara més complicat anomenat procediment d'habeas corpus federal. I el quart capítol és quan poden succeir una varietat de coses. Els advocats poden presentar una petició de clemència o poden iniciar un litigi encara més complex o poden optar per no fer res. Però el quart capítol acaba sempre amb una execució.
The second chapter consists of a complicated legal proceeding known as a state habeas corpus appeal. The third chapter is an even more complicated legal proceeding known as a federal habeas corpus proceeding. And the fourth chapter is one where a variety of things can happen. The lawyers might file a clemency petition, they might initiate even more complex litigation, or they might not do anything at all. But that fourth chapter always ends with an execution.
Quan vaig començar a representar presos al corredor de la mort fa 20 anys, els condemnats a mort no tenien dret a un advocat ni durant el segon ni el quart capítol d'aquesta història. Estaven sols. De fet, no va ser fins a finals dels 80 que van assolir el dret a un advocat durant el tercer capítol de la història. Així que el que havien de fer era confiar en advocats voluntaris que s'ocupessin dels seus casos. El problema és que hi havia molts més presos al corredor de la mort que advocats amb l'interès i la preparació per a treballar en aquells casos.
When I started representing death row inmates more than 20 years ago, people on death row did not have a right to a lawyer in either the second or the fourth chapter of this story. They were on their own. In fact, it wasn't until the late 1980s that they acquired a right to a lawyer during the third chapter of the story. So what all of these death row inmates had to do was rely on volunteer lawyers to handle their legal proceedings. The problem is that there were way more guys on death row than there were lawyers who had both the interest and the expertise to work on these cases.
Inevitablement, els advocats s'inclinaven per casos que ja estaven al quart capítol −és lògic, és clar. Eren els casos més urgents, eren els que més a prop estaven de ser executats. Alguns advocats se'n sortien: aconseguien nous judicis per als seus clients. Altres aconseguien allargar-los la vida, a vegades, anys; a vegades, mesos.
And so inevitably, lawyers drifted to cases that were already in chapter four -- that makes sense, of course. Those are the cases that are most urgent; those are the guys who are closest to being executed. Some of these lawyers were successful; they managed to get new trials for their clients. Others of them managed to extend the lives of their clients, sometimes by years, sometimes by months.
Però el que no succeí mai fou que es produís una davallada seriosa i sostinguda en el nombre anual d'execucions a Texas. De fet, com podeu veure a la gràfica, des que el sistema d'execucions de Texas esdevingué eficient, de mitjans a finals dels 90, només hi ha hagut un parell d'anys en què el nombre anual d'execucions hagi caigut per sota de 20.
But the one thing that didn't happen was that there was never a serious and sustained decline in the number of annual executions in Texas. In fact, as you can see from this graph, from the time that the Texas execution apparatus got efficient in the mid- to late 1990s, there have only been a couple of years where the number of annual executions dipped below 20.
En un any típic a Texas, la mitjana és de dues persones al mes. Alguns anys, a Texas, hem executat gairebé 40 persones, i aquest nombre no ha baixat significativament en els darrers 15 anys. Tot i això, mentre continuem executant més o menys el mateix nombre de gent cada any, el nombre de sentenciats a mort anualment ha caigut dràsticament. Així que trobem aquesta paradoxa, el nombre d'execucions anuals es manté alt, mentre que el nombre de nous sentenciats a mort ha baixat. Per què passa això? No es pot atribuir a un descens en el nombre d'assassinats, perquè el nombre d'assassinats no ha caigut de forma tan pronunciada com ho ha fet la línea vermella d'aquesta gràfica. El que ha passat, en canvi, és que els jurats han començat a sentenciar més gent a penes de cadena perpètua sense llibertat condicional, en comptes d'enviar-los a la sala d'execucions.
In a typical year in Texas, we're averaging about two people a month. In some years in Texas, we've executed close to 40 people, and this number has never significantly declined over the last 15 years. And yet, at the same time that we continue to execute about the same number of people every year, the number of people who we're sentencing to death on an annual basis has dropped rather steeply. So we have this paradox, which is that the number of annual executions has remained high but the number of new death sentences has gone down. Why is that? It can't be attributed to a decline in the murder rate, because the murder rate has not declined nearly so steeply as the red line on that graph has gone down. What has happened instead is that juries have started to sentence more and more people to prison for the rest of their lives without the possibility of parole, rather than sending them to the execution chamber.
Per què ha passat això? No ha succeït perquè hagi desaparegut el suport popular per la pena de mort. Els que s'oposen a la pena de mort es consolen perquè el suport a la pena de mort a Texas està en el seu punt més baix. Sabeu què significa el punt més baix a Texas? Significa que està al 60%. Això està molt bé comparat amb mitjans dels 80, quan superava el 80%, però no podem explicar el descens de sentències de mort i la preferència per la cadena perpètua sense llibertat condicional per una erosió en el suport a la pena de mort, perquè la gent encara hi està a favor.
Why has that happened? It hasn't happened because of a dissolution of popular support for the death penalty. Death penalty opponents take great solace in the fact that death penalty support in Texas is at an all-time low. Do you know what all-time low in Texas means? It means that it's in the low 60 percent. Now, that's really good compared to the mid-1980s, when it was in excess of 80 percent, but we can't explain the decline in death sentences and the affinity for life without the possibility of parole by an erosion of support for the death penalty, because people still support the death penalty.
Què ha passat per causar aquest fenomen? Que els advocats que representen a condemnats a mort han passat a ocupar-se dels capítols previs d'aquesta història.
What's happened to cause this phenomenon? What's happened is that lawyers who represent death row inmates have shifted their focus to earlier and earlier chapters of the death penalty story.
Així, fa 25 anys, es concentraven en el quart capítol. I passaren del quart capítol fa 25 anys, al tercer capítol a finals dels 80. I passaren del tercer capítol a finals dels 80, al segon capítol a meitats dels 90. I des de meitats fins a finals dels 90, passaren al primer capítol de la història.
So 25 years ago, they focused on chapter four. And they went from chapter four 25 years ago to chapter three in the late 1980s. And they went from chapter three in the late 1980s to chapter two in the mid-1990s. And beginning in the mid- to late 1990s, they began to focus on chapter one of the story.
Podeu pensar que la davallada en sentències de mort i l'increment en el nombre de cadenes perpètues és bo o dolent. No vull parlar sobre això avui. El que us vull dir és que la raó que ho explica és que els advocats hem entès que com més aviat intervens en un cas, majors són les probabilitats de salvar la vida del teu client. És el primer que he après.
Now, you might think that this decline in death sentences and the increase in the number of life sentences is a good thing or a bad thing. I don't want to have a conversation about that today. All that I want to tell you is that the reason that this has happened is because death penalty lawyers have understood that the earlier you intervene in a case, the greater the likelihood that you're going to save your client's life. That's the first thing I've learned.
La segona cosa que he après: el meu client Will no era una excepció a la regla: ell era la regla. A vegades dic: "Si em dius el nom d'un condemnat a mort −tant se val de quin estat, encara que no l'hagi conegut mai−, t'escriuré la seva biografia." I 8 de cada 10 vegades, els detalls de la biografia seran més o menys correctes.
Here's the second thing I learned: My client Will was not the exception to the rule; he was the rule. I sometimes say, if you tell me the name of a death row inmate -- doesn't matter what state he's in, doesn't matter if I've ever met him before -- I'll write his biography for you. And eight out of 10 times, the details of that biography will be more or less accurate.
I la raó és que el 80% dels condemnats a mort són gent que prové del mateix tipus de família disfuncional que en Will. El 80% dels condemnats a mort ha passat pel sistema judicial juvenil. Aquesta és la segona lliçó que he après.
And the reason for that is that 80 percent of the people on death row are people who came from the same sort of dysfunctional family that Will did. Eighty percent of the people on death row are people who had exposure to the juvenile justice system. That's the second lesson that I've learned.
Ara som just a tocar d'aquell punt que us deia en què tothom coincideix. Alguns dels presents poden dissentir sobre si en Will hauria d'haver estar executat, però penso que tothom estaria d'acord en què la millor versió possible d'aquesta història seria una història en què no hi ha cap assassinat. Com podem aconseguir-ho?
Now we're right on the cusp of that corner where everybody's going to agree. People in this room might disagree about whether Will should have been executed, but I think everybody would agree that the best possible version of his story would be a story where no murder ever occurs. How do we do that?
Quan el nostre fill feia aquell problema de mates fa 2 setmanes, era un problema enrevessat. I estava aprenent que, quan tens un problema enrevessat, a vegades la solució és dividir-lo en problemes més petits. Ho fem per a la majoria de problemes −mates, física, fins i tot política social− els dividim en problemes més petits, més manejables. Però de tant en tant, com en Dwight Eisenhower digué: la forma de resoldre un problema és fer-lo més gran.
When our son Lincoln was working on that math problem two weeks ago, it was a big, gnarly problem. And he was learning how, when you have a big old gnarly problem, sometimes the solution is to slice it into smaller problems. That's what we do for most problems -- in math, in physics, even in social policy -- we slice them into smaller, more manageable problems. But every once in a while, as Dwight Eisenhower said, the way you solve a problem is to make it bigger.
La forma de resoldre aquest problema és fer aquest assumpte de la pena de mort més gran. Hem de dir-nos: "D'acord. Tenim aquests quatre capítols en una història de pena de mort, però què passa abans que comenci?" Com podem intervenir en la vida d'un assassí abans que ho sigui? Quines opcions tenim per fer que aquesta persona no segueixi el camí que la durà a un resultat que tothom −defensors i detractors− pensa que és un mal resultat: l'assassinat d'una persona innocent?
The way we solve this problem is to make the issue of the death penalty bigger. We have to say, all right. We have these four chapters of a death penalty story, but what happens before that story begins? How can we intervene in the life of a murderer before he's a murderer? What options do we have to nudge that person off of the path that is going to lead to a result that everybody -- death penalty supporters and death penalty opponents -- still think is a bad result: the murder of an innocent human being?
Es diu que hi ha coses que no són enginyeria aeronàutica. Es diu quan parlem de quelcom molt complicat i aquest problema és realment simple. Això és enginyeria aeronàutica: aquesta és l'expressió matemàtica per calcular la propulsió d'un coet. Del que parlem avui és tan complicat com això. Del que parlem avui és també enginyeria aeronàutica.
You know, sometimes people say that something isn't rocket science. And by that, what they mean is rocket science is really complicated and this problem that we're talking about now is really simple. Well that's rocket science; that's the mathematical expression for the thrust created by a rocket. What we're talking about today is just as complicated. What we're talking about today is also rocket science.
El meu client Will i el 80% dels condemnats a mort tenien cinc capítols a les seves vides que anaven abans dels quatre capítols de la història de la pena de mort. Penso en aquests cinc capítols com a punts d'intervenció, moments a les seves vides en els quals la nostra societat podia haver intervingut perquè no seguissin el camí en què es trobaven i que creà una conseqüència en la que tots coincidim −defensors i detractors− que és un mal resultat.
My client Will and 80 percent of the people on death row had five chapters in their lives that came before the four chapters of the death penalty story. I think of these five chapters as points of intervention, places in their lives when our society could've intervened in their lives and nudged them off of the path that they were on that created a consequence that we all -- death penalty supporters or death penalty opponents -- say was a bad result.
En cadascun d'aquest cinc capítols, quan la mare n'estava embarassada; durant la seva primera infància; quan anava a l'escola primària; a la secundària obligatòria i postobligatòria; i durant el seu pas pel sistema judicial juvenil− durant tots aquests cinc capítols, hi havia moltes coses que la societat hauria pogut fer. De fet, si imaginem que hi ha cinc diferents formes d'intervenció, com podria intervenir la societat en cadascun d'aquests cinc capítols, i poguéssim combinar-los com volguéssim, hi ha 3.000 −més de 3.000− possibles estratègies que podríem adoptar perquè els nois com en Will no segueixin aquest camí.
Now, during each of these five chapters: when his mother was pregnant with him; in his early childhood years; when he was in elementary school; when he was in middle school and then high school; and when he was in the juvenile justice system -- during each of those five chapters, there were a wide variety of things that society could have done. In fact, if we just imagine that there are five different modes of intervention, the way that society could intervene in each of those five chapters, and we could mix and match them any way we want, there are 3,000 -- more than 3,000 -- possible strategies that we could embrace in order to nudge kids like Will off of the path that they're on.
No sóc aquí amb la solució. Però, el fet que encara ens quedi molt per aprendre, no significa que no sapiguem ja moltes coses. Sabem per experiències en altres estats que hi ha una gran varietat de mètodes d'intervenció que podríem estar usant a Texas, i en qualsevol altre estat que no les estigui emprant, per tal de prevenir una conseqüència que tots considerem dolenta.
So I'm not standing here today with the solution. But the fact that we still have a lot to learn, that doesn't mean that we don't know a lot already. We know from experience in other states that there are a wide variety of modes of intervention that we could be using in Texas, and in every other state that isn't using them, in order to prevent a consequence that we all agree is bad.
En mencionaré algunes. No parlaré avui sobre la reforma del sistema legal. Probablement una qüestió que és millor reservar per a una sala plena d'advocats i jutges. Deixin-me parlar sobre un parell de mètodes d'intervenció que tots podem ajudar a dur a terme, perquè són formes d'intervenció que es faran realitat quan els legisladors, quan els contribuents i ciutadans, decideixin que això és el que hem de fer que és així com hem de gastar-nos els diners.
I'll just mention a few. I won't talk today about reforming the legal system. That's probably a topic that is best reserved for a room full of lawyers and judges. Instead, let me talk about a couple of modes of intervention that we can all help accomplish, because they are modes of intervention that will come about when legislators and policymakers, when taxpayers and citizens, agree that that's what we ought to be doing and that's how we ought to be spending our money.
Podríem oferir assistència en la primera infància per a nens desafavorits per motius econòmics o d'altres tipus, i ho podríem fer de forma gratuïta. I aconseguir que els nois com en Will no segueixen aquest camí. Hi ha altres estats que ho fan, però no el nostre.
We could be providing early childhood care for economically disadvantaged and otherwise troubled kids, and we could be doing it for free. And we could be nudging kids like Will off of the path that we're on. There are other states that do that, but we don't.
Podríem establir escoles especials, a nivell de secundària obligatòria i postobligatòria, però fins i tot a nivell d'infantil, centrades en nens desafavorits per motius econòmics o d'altres, i particularment els que hagin passat pel sistema judicial juvenil. Hi ha uns quants estats que ho fan, Texas, no.
We could be providing special schools, at both the high school level and the middle school level, but even in K-5, that target economically and otherwise disadvantaged kids, and particularly kids who have had exposure to the juvenile justice system. There are a handful of states that do that; Texas doesn't.
Hi ha una altra cosa que podem fer −bé, n'hi ha moltes− hi ha una cosa que mencionaré ara, i que serà l'única cosa controvertida que diré avui. Podríem intervenir de forma molt més agressiva en llars perillosament disfuncionals, i treure'n els nens abans que les seves mares agafin un ganivet per matar-los. Si ho fem, necessitarem un lloc per a ells.
There's one other thing we can be doing -- well, there are a bunch of other things -- there's one other thing that I'm going to mention, and this is going to be the only controversial thing that I say today. We could be intervening much more aggressively into dangerously dysfunctional homes, and getting kids out of them before their moms pick up butcher knives and threaten to kill them. If we're going to do that, we need a place to put them.
Fins i tot si fem tot això, alguns nois se'ns escaparan i acabaran igualment en aquell darrer capítol abans de l'inici de la història: acabaran en mans del sistema judicial juvenil. I fins i tot si això passa, tampoc és massa tard. Encara som a temps de fer alguna cosa, si és que volem, en comptes de castigar-los.
Even if we do all of those things, some kids are going to fall through the cracks and they're going to end up in that last chapter before the murder story begins, they're going to end up in the juvenile justice system. And even if that happens, it's not yet too late. There's still time to nudge them, if we think about nudging them rather than just punishing them.
Hi ha dos catedràtics al nord-est −l'un a Yale i l'altre a Maryland− que han creat una escola annexa a una presó juvenil. I els nois són a la presó però van a l'escola de vuit del matí a quatre de la tarda. La logística era difícil. Necessitaven trobar professors que volguessin treballar en una presó, establir una estricta separació entre els que treballen a l'escola i les autoritats penitenciàries, i el que era més desafiant, van haver de crear un nou currículum perquè, sabeu què? La gent no entra i surt de presó per semestres.
There are two professors in the Northeast -- one at Yale and one at Maryland -- they set up a school that is attached to a juvenile prison. And the kids are in prison, but they go to school from eight in the morning until four in the afternoon. Now, it was logistically difficult. They had to recruit teachers who wanted to teach inside a prison, they had to establish strict separation between the people who work at the school and the prison authorities, and most dauntingly of all, they needed to invent a new curriculum because you know what? People don't come into and out of prison on a semester basis.
(Rialles)
(Laughter)
Però van fer totes aquestes coses.
But they did all those things.
Ara, què tenen en comú totes aquestes coses? El que tenen en comú és que costen diners. Alguns dels presents poden ser prou vells per a recordar aquell paio de l'anunci de filtres d'oli. Deia: "Bé, em pots pagar ara o em pots pagar després." El que estem fent amb el sistema de la pena de mort és que estem pagant després.
Now, what do all of these things have in common? What all of these things have in common is that they cost money. Some of the people in the room might be old enough to remember the guy on the old oil filter commercial. He used to say, "Well, you can pay me now or you can pay me later." What we're doing in the death penalty system is we're paying later.
Però la cosa és que, per cada 15.000 dòlars que gastem intervenint en les vides de nens desafavorits per motius econòmics o d'altres en els capítols anteriors, n'estalviem 80.000 després en costos relacionats amb crims. Fins i tot si no esteu d'acord que hi hagi un imperatiu moral per a fer-ho, té sentit, econòmicament parlant.
But the thing is that for every 15,000 dollars that we spend intervening in the lives of economically and otherwise disadvantaged kids in those earlier chapters, we save 80,000 dollars in crime-related costs down the road. Even if you don't agree that there's a moral imperative that we do it, it just makes economic sense.
Us vull parlar ara sobre la darrera conversa amb en Will. Fou el dia que l'anaven a executar, i estàvem simplement parlant. No hi havia res més a fer en el seu cas. I estàvem parlant sobre la seva vida. I primer em parlà del seu pare, a qui gairebé no conegué, i que ja havia mort, i després de la seva mare, a qui sí conegué, i que seguia viva.
I want to tell you about the last conversation that I had with Will. It was the day that he was going to be executed, and we were just talking. There was nothing left to do in his case. And we were talking about his life. And he was talking first about his dad, who he hardly knew, who had died, and then about his mom, who he did know, who was still alive.
I li vaig dir: "Conec la història. He llegit els informes. Sé que ella intentà matar-te. Però sempre m'he preguntat si tu te'n recordes de debò." Li vaig dir: "Jo no recordo res de quan tenia cinc anys. Potser només recordes que algú t'ho explicà."
And I said to him, "I know the story. I've read the records. I know that she tried to kill you." I said, "But I've always wondered whether you really actually remember that." I said, "I don't remember anything from when I was five years old. Maybe you just remember somebody telling you."
I ell em mirà i s'inclinà cap endavant, i em va dir: "Professor" −feia 12 anys que ens coneixíem i encara em deia professor. Em va dir: "Professor, no vull ofrendre'l, però si la seva mare agafa un ganivet que sembla més gran que vostè i el persegueix per la casa cridant que el matarà, i s'ha de tancar al lavabo fent força contra la porta i cridar fins que arribi la policia," em mirà i em digué: "això no s'oblida."
And he looked at me and he leaned forward, and he said, "Professor," -- he'd known me for 12 years, he still called me Professor. He said, "Professor, I don't mean any disrespect by this, but when your mama picks up a butcher knife that looks bigger than you are, and chases you through the house screaming she's going to kill you, and you have to lock yourself in the bathroom and lean against the door and holler for help until the police get there," he looked at me and he said, "that's something you don't forget."
Espero que hi hagi una cosa que no oblidin mai: entre que han arribat aquí aquest matí i l'hora del dinar, hi haurà quatre homicidis als Estats Units. Dedicarem una quantitat ingent de recursos socials a castigar la gent que ha comès aquests crims, i això és apropiat perquè hem de castigar qui faci coses dolentes. Però tres d'aquests crims eren evitables.
I hope there's one thing you all won't forget: In between the time you arrived here this morning and the time we break for lunch, there are going to be four homicides in the United States. We're going to devote enormous social resources to punishing the people who commit those crimes, and that's appropriate because we should punish people who do bad things. But three of those crimes are preventable.
Si fem la imatge més gran i concentrem la nostra atenció als capítols previs, llavors mai haurem d'escriure la primera frase de la història de la pena de mort.
If we make the picture bigger and devote our attention to the earlier chapters, then we're never going to write the first sentence that begins the death penalty story.
Gràcies.
Thank you.
(Aplaudiments)
(Applause)