Civil Commotion

A letter in today’s edition of the New York Times revisits something I’ve mentioned in the past: The American judicial system cannot be trusted to reliably decide who lives and dies, and for that reason the evidential bar must be raised dramatically or the death penalty should be abolished.

To the Editor:

I practiced as a criminal defense attorney for many years and tried a lot of murder cases, including death penalty cases. The conclusion that I reached after all those years was quite simple. The American criminal justice system is not competent to decide who lives and who dies. That conclusion is supported in the news on an almost daily basis. The death penalty is a bridge too far.

CLARK LANDRUM, TIFTON, GA.

My first freelance assignments were true crime pieces for the old (now defunct) true crime magazines: True Crime, Headquarters Detective, et cetera. I spent a lot of time sitting in rural courthouse basements reading through files, and that experience left me with no philosophical objection per se to the death penalty; there are people who need to be dead, and the sooner the better. But it left me, also, with a deep lack of confidence in the ability of the judicial system to reliably determine who those people are.

Cops and prosecutors sometimes lie on the theory that Bubba belongs in jail; if he didn’t commit this crime he’ll commit some other. Juries are harder on others than they are on defendants they can recognize as somehow like themselves — on and on. And a lot of Americans are more affected by theater, even bad theater, than facts. If the evidence standard is not raised decisively — a DNA connection documented by two different laboratories, at least one of them independent of the prosecution, or a guilty plea accompanied by the location of the body, say — a conviction should not be eligible for the death penalty.

The “criminal deep state?” This is an egregious smear of the federal government’s law enforcement function, and puts Trump in overt opposition to the government he is supposed to head and be running.

Do your duty, Congress.

The Southwestern Seminary statement on the change of Patterson’s status is a masterpiece of dissembling. I reproduce it in full below:

Statement Regarding Dr. Paige Patterson

By SWBTS Board of Trustees on May 23, 2018

The Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS) board of trustees is grateful for the contributions Dr. and Mrs. Paige Patterson have made since his presidency began in 2003. Further, we honor his longstanding dedication and commitment to serving the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) in its mission to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations by leading the way for the conservative resurgence.

A special meeting of the SWBTS Board was held on May 22 to discuss our seminary, its future and our responsibility as trustees to ensure SWBTS is in the best position possible to fulfill our mission to biblically educate God-called men and women.

After much prayer and a more than 13-hour discussion regarding challenges facing the Institution, including those of enrollment, financial, leadership and institutional identity, the Board determined to move in the direction of new leadership for the benefit of the future mission of the Seminary.

The board passed a motion through a majority vote to appoint Dr. Patterson as President Emeritus with compensation, effective immediately, which he accepted. In addition, the board passed a motion to affirm the trustees’ September 2017 offer for Dr. and Mrs. Patterson to live on campus as the first theologians-in-residence at the Baptist Heritage Center, scheduled to be completed in July 2018.

The board also voted to appoint Dr. D. Jeffrey Bingham, Dean of the School of Theology, to the position of Interim President, pending his acceptance. Further, a special committee of the trustees was formed to work out all the details of leadership transition for Drs. Patterson and Bingham.

Additionally, the board affirmed a motion stating 1) evidence exists that Dr. Patterson has complied with reporting laws regarding assault and abuse, 2) the Seminary stands against all forms of abuse and 3) the board has not found evidence of misconduct in Nathan Montgomery’s employment file.

As we begin the process of ushering in a new season of leadership, SWBTS remains steadfast in its calling to assist the churches of the SBC by biblically educating God-called men and women for ministries that fulfill the Great Commission and glorify God.

FOR INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Charles Patrick, (817) 923-1921, ext. 3025, cpatrick@swbts.edu

There is no unpleasantness in Baptistland. None. Ever. And, with compensation, a residence, a stained-glass window and none of the day-to-day aggravation of running the seminary, it looks to me as if Patterson came out ahead for his bad behavior.

Truly, He works in Mysterious Ways.

A Southwestern Seminary board meeting that was widely expected to affirm Paige Patterson’s Awesome Godliness was thrown into chaos yesterday when the Washington Post moved a story, shortly after the meeting began, alleging that Patterson counseled a female student at Southeastern Seminary to not report being raped by another seminary student.

In the event, the meeting lasted more than 13-hours and Patterson was appointed President Emeritus, effective immediately.

Prominent Southern Baptist leader Paige Patterson was removed from his job as president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary amid an evangelical #MeToo moment: a massive backlash from women upset over comments he made in the past that are being newly perceived as sexist and demeaning. In a brief statement early Wednesday, the seminary’s board of trustees made him president emeritus but did not state a reason for his removal.

Since Patterson is such a celebrity within the SBC for his role in the so-called Conservative Resurgence, there was never much realistic expectation that his disdainful treatment of women would get him fired; many of the trustees doubtless believe and behave the same, and it is probably the unexpected appearance of the Washington Post story that led to his downfall.

Patterson departs office with the honorific and no formal record of his discreditable conduct. Since there was no way the board could have gotten away with firing Patterson without igniting a riot by the geriatrics who think he is a Great Man, easing him up is probably all they could do.

There have been no reports yet of the progress of the SWBTS Board meeting, so there is no telling what is the status of their deliberations or how things are leaning regarding Patterson’s future. Nor can we know if this news story has penetrated into the meeting.

Would anybody’s mind change if the story is available to the meeting? Dunno, though I doubt it. Most of the Board, I imagine, would simply dismiss it as #FakeNews meant to poison their deliberations.