Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Sunday Morning

Interview With Alex Kotlowitz

Aired July 06, 2003 - 10:43   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Florida has freed 25 inmates from death row since 1975. That's more than any other state. Governor Jeb Bush and other death penalty supporters say that shows system works. Opponents say it's a sign the state could be killing innocent people. Some are calling for an independent review of Florida's system. Meanwhile, Governor Bush says the executions will continue.
So what does it take to punish a person with death? What are the factors involved for jurors on death row cases? The "New York Times" magazine takes an in-depth look inside the jury's box in the article In the Face of Death". And Alex Kotlowitz wrote it and comes to us from Chicago. All right. Good so see you, Alex.

ALEX KOTLOWITZ, NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: All right, well what did you find and how did you assemble folks who were willing to talk about such a sensitive topic?

KOTLOWITZ: Well I looked for a case in which there was no question of guilt or innocence, and which it was clear that this individual in this case had done it, and then hoped that I could get the jurors to share with me the process by which they ended up making a decision about whether this individual live or died.

So it's a case in Indianapolis of a young man 18 years old that goes into a convenience store late at night to rob it, and goes in shooting, and kills the clerk. Somebody he, in fact, knew because he had worked at the store. The whole murder was caught on video. So no question about whether or not he did it or not. And these 12 jurors, all of whom are -- believe in the death penalty, it's a requirement to sit on a capital case, all convict him and find him guilty, have watched the video, horrified by the crime and they're all convinced in fact that they're, going to put him to death. And it's about how this jury, the story's about how this jury comes to spare this individual's life.

WHITFIELD: Now, even though all of these jurors you said believe in the death penalty, it's the emotional wrangling that takes place beyond just looking at the evidence and trying to justify whether, indeed, someone should be convicted in the case. How did you explore that issue?

KOTLOWITZ: Sure, capital cases are unlike any other criminal trial. You have your guilt phase, which are very similar to how any other trial works, in which you decide on guilt or innocence. And, once you've decided somebody's is guilty in a capital case you then have what's called the penalty phase.

It's the second phase of the trial which can often be more elaborate and more profound than the guilt phase. And in that phase, essentially the defendant's life is unraveled, unfolds, and jurors are asked to weigh the aggravators against the mitigators. The aggravators being the crime itself. What was involved in the crime, how heinous was it.

And the mitigators, all that which might help them at least explain how that individual got to that place where they committed this horrible murder. And so in this particular case, the jurors over the course of a week hear the life story of this defendant, and each of them in their own way, each of the jurors, I think, begin to so see some of their own frailties reflected in the life of the defendant.

WHITFIELD: And is that how some of the jurors came kind of to a crossroads, feeling like well, I don't feel as definitive about the death penalty as I once did going into it.

KOTLOWITZ: Right, I mean for me one of the surprises was -- because I knew going into it how the jury had decided. Is it a clearly in the end for many of these jurors, if not most of them, it -- I think it made them less certain about the death penalty. As one of them said to me, once you hear one individual story, why does that make it any different than another's? How do you decide whose life is worth sparing? It's this incredible moral moment when jurors are asked not only to wrestle with legal culpability, but also moral culpability as well.

WHITFIELD: Well what was it about the death penalty issue that you felt needed further exploration and perhaps from the point of the view of the jurors who have to make a very serious decision?

KOTLOWITZ: Well I actually came at the story from a personal place. I had been asked a couple years ago. I got two phone calls within the course of a few months, asking if I'd be a expert witness in the penalty phase of two separate capital cases. Neither of which have come to trial. And I began talking to the attorneys and I was surprised by the process that was involved because I -- I guess I assumed perhaps naively if it was a capital case and the person was found guilty, that then it was clear that they would be put to death.

But clearly I was mistaken about that, and I became really intrigued by this process. And in some ways because part of what goes on there, is in some ways, What I do as a journalist, where you try to craft this narrative, this story about somebody's life in the hope of gaining empathy. For me it's gaining empathy for my readers. And in the case of the lawyers, it's the hope of gaining empathy with these jurors. And the other thing that struck me about this it was this moment when there was a really profound moral conversation about the death penalty that takes place in these behind closed doors in deliberations. But it's really what it's all about in the end.

WHITFIELD: Alex Kotlowitz, thanks very much. It's called "In the Face of Death" in today's edition of the "New York Times" magazine. Thanks so much. Good to see you. KOTLOWITZ: Thanks for having me.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired July 6, 2003 - 10:43   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Florida has freed 25 inmates from death row since 1975. That's more than any other state. Governor Jeb Bush and other death penalty supporters say that shows system works. Opponents say it's a sign the state could be killing innocent people. Some are calling for an independent review of Florida's system. Meanwhile, Governor Bush says the executions will continue.
So what does it take to punish a person with death? What are the factors involved for jurors on death row cases? The "New York Times" magazine takes an in-depth look inside the jury's box in the article In the Face of Death". And Alex Kotlowitz wrote it and comes to us from Chicago. All right. Good so see you, Alex.

ALEX KOTLOWITZ, NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: All right, well what did you find and how did you assemble folks who were willing to talk about such a sensitive topic?

KOTLOWITZ: Well I looked for a case in which there was no question of guilt or innocence, and which it was clear that this individual in this case had done it, and then hoped that I could get the jurors to share with me the process by which they ended up making a decision about whether this individual live or died.

So it's a case in Indianapolis of a young man 18 years old that goes into a convenience store late at night to rob it, and goes in shooting, and kills the clerk. Somebody he, in fact, knew because he had worked at the store. The whole murder was caught on video. So no question about whether or not he did it or not. And these 12 jurors, all of whom are -- believe in the death penalty, it's a requirement to sit on a capital case, all convict him and find him guilty, have watched the video, horrified by the crime and they're all convinced in fact that they're, going to put him to death. And it's about how this jury, the story's about how this jury comes to spare this individual's life.

WHITFIELD: Now, even though all of these jurors you said believe in the death penalty, it's the emotional wrangling that takes place beyond just looking at the evidence and trying to justify whether, indeed, someone should be convicted in the case. How did you explore that issue?

KOTLOWITZ: Sure, capital cases are unlike any other criminal trial. You have your guilt phase, which are very similar to how any other trial works, in which you decide on guilt or innocence. And, once you've decided somebody's is guilty in a capital case you then have what's called the penalty phase.

It's the second phase of the trial which can often be more elaborate and more profound than the guilt phase. And in that phase, essentially the defendant's life is unraveled, unfolds, and jurors are asked to weigh the aggravators against the mitigators. The aggravators being the crime itself. What was involved in the crime, how heinous was it.

And the mitigators, all that which might help them at least explain how that individual got to that place where they committed this horrible murder. And so in this particular case, the jurors over the course of a week hear the life story of this defendant, and each of them in their own way, each of the jurors, I think, begin to so see some of their own frailties reflected in the life of the defendant.

WHITFIELD: And is that how some of the jurors came kind of to a crossroads, feeling like well, I don't feel as definitive about the death penalty as I once did going into it.

KOTLOWITZ: Right, I mean for me one of the surprises was -- because I knew going into it how the jury had decided. Is it a clearly in the end for many of these jurors, if not most of them, it -- I think it made them less certain about the death penalty. As one of them said to me, once you hear one individual story, why does that make it any different than another's? How do you decide whose life is worth sparing? It's this incredible moral moment when jurors are asked not only to wrestle with legal culpability, but also moral culpability as well.

WHITFIELD: Well what was it about the death penalty issue that you felt needed further exploration and perhaps from the point of the view of the jurors who have to make a very serious decision?

KOTLOWITZ: Well I actually came at the story from a personal place. I had been asked a couple years ago. I got two phone calls within the course of a few months, asking if I'd be a expert witness in the penalty phase of two separate capital cases. Neither of which have come to trial. And I began talking to the attorneys and I was surprised by the process that was involved because I -- I guess I assumed perhaps naively if it was a capital case and the person was found guilty, that then it was clear that they would be put to death.

But clearly I was mistaken about that, and I became really intrigued by this process. And in some ways because part of what goes on there, is in some ways, What I do as a journalist, where you try to craft this narrative, this story about somebody's life in the hope of gaining empathy. For me it's gaining empathy for my readers. And in the case of the lawyers, it's the hope of gaining empathy with these jurors. And the other thing that struck me about this it was this moment when there was a really profound moral conversation about the death penalty that takes place in these behind closed doors in deliberations. But it's really what it's all about in the end.

WHITFIELD: Alex Kotlowitz, thanks very much. It's called "In the Face of Death" in today's edition of the "New York Times" magazine. Thanks so much. Good to see you. KOTLOWITZ: Thanks for having me.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com