"There was one very loud exception. A young African-American man shouted that Williams was a thug and a murderer and should die. He was not an agitator or a crank. He represented a body of pro-death penalty sentiment among blacks that has seldom been publicly heard during the great Tookie debate. I was not surprised when I heard this young man's words, for there are many blacks like him who want Williams dead." Kim Curtis Associated PressAP Wire | 12/07/2005 | Families of Williams' victims urge governor not to forget the victims

Tookie Williams, the convicted murderer and former street gang leader who is sentenced to die for his crimes, has sought clemency from the governor of Californian on December 8, 2005. Tookie, who still touts his gang name, has been very public with his claims of being a very changed man.

Some believe that the death penalty is inherently un-Christian. The fact is that God ordained his followers to obey the laws of the land. The California State Legislature re-instituted the death penalty statute in 1977, shortly after the Sharon Tate murder case, in which convicted murderer Charles Manson was sentenced to life in prison. Under the new statute, evidence in mitigation was permitted.

Why should a murderer be spared? Are the lives of the victims so cheap and dispensable to those who oppose the death penalty when such heinous crimes are committed? Why is society’s definition of "repentance" (simply claiming to be "sorry") a reason to allow a death sentence to be commuted to life in prison? Should a murderer be rewarded for merely conforming to the rules, once in prison?

Where is the outcry for the innocent? Where is the justice for the families who have been devastated by his lawlessness? The December 13, 2005, execution by lethal injection approaches a malingering gang member. Yet he refuses to admit his many crimes, nor does he offer any apologies to the families of his victims.

In truth, Stanley (Tookie) Williams was for many years anything but decent. His acts of violence rest heavily on society as well as his victims and their families. And he continued down this course even while serving time in prison. Suddenly, he began to "see the light."

But to this day he expresses no remorse for those four lives that he took. Instead, Williams argues of the unfairness of his trail. And of course, the "race card" is very predictably being played. Ultimately, the standard premises of liberal social "reformation" are repeated by the media and Willams’ advocates.

A fair trial and swift punishment are what should have transpired, were true justice to have been served in this case. Williams’ protracted incarceration, in the wake of his conviction and death sentence, served justice to no one. Vicious killers often prove to be a threat to other inmates as well as the employees of our prison systems. And as always, those citizens who abide by the law face the risk of a liberal judge who might allow such individuals back on the streets to kill again.

Let us not forget that often, the rite of initiation into gang life requires the killing an innocent victim. The families of the victims of such murders are left with insurmountable, horrific pain. These families are again victimized by those who, in supposed deference to the lives of convicted murderers, prove themselves heartless and indifferent to the loss of truly innocent lives.

If the governor of the state of California allows Williams to live, justice will not have been upheld. Nor can anyone claim such an outcome to be the result of "compassion" or "mercy." Among reasonable people, abhorrence for the death penalty pales in comparison to the abhorrence they should experience when they learn of the details of the murders he committed. Of course, those opposing his just sentence are not willing to have such details revealed to the public.

Hollywood has taken up his case. Actor Jamie Foxx played the role of Williams in a movie that paved the way for the present media blitz. While giving cursory attention to the brutality and violence of his past, the bleeding hearts of Beverly Hills seek to portray him as an endearing individual, presenting him complete with dialog, soundtrack and music.

Books that this murderer wrote (with the help of another writer) are being touted by the liberal media as proof of his redemption. Yet if Williams truly wanted to change for the good, he could confess to the four brutal murders that he committed. He might also expound on the fact that the law is just and that he deserves to be punished to its fullest extent. Williams also needs to renounce his gang name. People might then perhaps have the tiniest reason to take his pleas for clemency seriously.

When a person feels the power of true redemption he understands the plan. He knows that he is forgiven for all of his sins by God. God will not always remove us from the punishment resulting from our willful behavior. But children of God understand that often they are not spared the justice meted out to them by society. Rather, they are prepared to accept the consequences for their transgressions with dignity. This is the turning away from the "old man of n" (Romans 6:6) and a sign of conversion in the truest Christian sense.

The true goal of many involved in this fight is to overturn the death penalty altogether. If Tookie Williams is allowed to live, others in his situation will raise the tenor of this legal battle. The cries of those condoning violence and murder (by their unwillingness to see such crimes appropriately punished), will be heard louder and clearer than ever before.

But where, in the midst of this tempest, is the justice for those whose voices can no longer be heard?

Following are excerpts from an AP article
CNN.com - The many facets of Tookie Williams
Cold-blooded murder spree

On February 28, 1979, about 4 a.m., Williams and three friends got high on their psychedelic smokes and took two cars, a 12-gauge shotgun and a .22-caliber handgun to Pomona in search of a place to rob, according to court documents. They ended up at a 7-Eleven where Albert Owens, 26, was working the overnight shift, sweeping the parking lot.

The military veteran was a "redheaded, freckle-faced kid who had the biggest smile you wanted to see," according to his older brother, Wayne Owens, 55, of Olathe, Kansas. Albert Owens said, "Take everything you want," says the now-retired prosecutor, Robert Martin, who remembers the case in detail.

Williams ordered Owens into a back room at gunpoint, shot out a security monitor, then ordered, "Get down on your knees, (expletive)," and shot him twice in the back, according to testimony. Williams "later laughed about it as he was eating his hamburger," Martin says.

There were no witnesses other than accomplices.Less than two weeks later, on March 11, Williams broke down the door at the Brookhaven Motel, ripping through four locks and shattering the molding, according to a prosecutor. Killed were Yen-I Yang, 76; his wife, Tsai-Shai Yang, 63, and their visiting daughter, Yee-Chen Lin, 43. The Taiwanese immigrants were about to sell the business because the neighborhood had become too rough, Martin said.

Insists he's innocent "Again, there were no surviving witnesses. Three of Williams' friends -- all with criminal histories and motivation to lie, Williams says -- testified that he confessed to them. A ballistics expert linked a shotgun shell at the motel to Williams' gun.Williams maintains he's innocent despite several unsuccessful appeals. His conviction took him off the street, but failed to halt the growth of the Crips he had founded in 1971 when he and Raymond Washington, a high school friend, formed a gang they called the Cribs. Drunken members routinely mispronounced it as "Crips" and the misnomer stuck.

From behind bars he watched as the neighborhood gang he helped form grew into a nationwide, drug-dealing criminal organization responsible for thousands of deaths. One of his two sons, Stanley Williams Jr., joined the gang and is now serving time for second-degree murder.

Prison officials said recently that they believe the elder Williams is still involved in the gang, calling shots from the prison, though they acknowledged they don't have hard evidence. "A con always will say one thing to you while the whole time he has another agenda," prison spokesman Vernell Crittendon said. "I'm concerned that possibly this marketing that's going on ... leads the public to hear the words, but not to see that sleight of hand."