Festival coverage sponsored by IndiePix.
Thoughts on three films screening at this week's Hot Docs Film Festival in Toronto. Note - I screened each of these films as part of the documentary competition at the Sarasota Film Festival.
I've long been intrigued by the emotional capacity of the pre-60s generation, men scarred by world war, depression and an unforeseen boom of babies, money and technology. AMC's acclaimed drama series Mad Men delves into this at some length, the idea that between the harsh disciplinarian (and often, frankly, abusive) fathers of the previous generation and the exploring, experimenting youths that would follow were men caught between worlds. How does one grow up in an era where love is not expressed, emotion is contained, yet still relate to children who are conditioned that it's important to express love and perfectly fine to wear one's heart on one's sleeve.
This exploration may not be the entire centerpiece of Peter Gilbert and Steve James' superior new film AT THE DEATH HOUSE DOOR, but it's the element that resonated with me the most. Focusing on Pastor Carroll Pickett, a man early in the film reveals himself to more married to his church and his parishoners than to his wife and children, Gilbert and James approach the subject of the death penalty with deft restraint.
Pickett is by all appearances a conservative. When called upon by the local Huntsville, Texas prison to be the death house counselor, the one who will guide a condemned man (or woman) during his or her last hours, he serves - not just because he is a proponent of the death penalty but also because he comes to believe that God has called upon him to guide those about to be executed. No matter what he sees or experiences, he maintains a stoic and resolute face, revealing himself only to a tape recorder. For at the heart of Gilbert and James' character study are a series of audio tapes made by Pickett, one following each execution for which he served as both shepherd and witness. The recordings are eerie, haunting, as Pickett recalls, in the most matter of fact way, the last meal, last words and that final moment when the deadly drug concoction begins to enter the prisoner's arm.
Gilbert and James fill the frame with Pickett's weathered face, to the point where one senses the emotion that remains bottled up inside from the smallest glance. It's heartbreaking when, later in the film, Pickett's wife wonders aloud whether that these audio records (which fill several boxes, such is the frequency of Pickett's task) are essentially his tears.
The filmmakers interweave Pickett's memories with a modern day whodunit - two Chicago newspaper reporters who believe that the state of Texas killed the wrong man, an execution witnessed more than a decade ago by Pickett. While there are no big revelations in this storyline, the central facts (and our protagonist's reaction at the time - disturbingly captured on those audio cassettes) ask questions not merely about a societal desire for vengeance, but also about the perilous intersection of generations and of questions of justice and mercy.
If you can't cry for the innocent man after walking an innocent man to his death, can you ever cry for yourself?
Equally battlescarred are the subjects of Tamar Yarom's TO SEE IF I'M SMILING, a powerful look at women who have served their compulsory service in the Israeli army. Using a series of straightforward interviews with veterans, Yarom combines the soldiers' home videos, photographs and newly shot footage to examine the lasting consequences of compelling young men and women to bear arms for their country. With a deft touch (and in a scant 52 minute run time), Yarom effectively deals with some discouraging artifacts of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the reaction of seemingly normal young women to everyday Palestinians. Can these women, now trained to suspect and draw their guns on women and children, retain humanity in the face of terror? Therein lies a universal question rooted very much in our own universal here and now.
I won't give away where the title of the film comes from, but suffice to say that I thought the sequence in which a central character says the words "to see if I'm smiling" is perhaps the most powerful few minutes of nonfiction I've seen this year. In that one, singular moment, Yarom trains her lens on a subject in the midst of personal conflict, transition, hell. We've seen a similar character in America's recent bloodied and bowed military history (and, indeed, that woman will soon grace the big screens in the new film from an Oscar-winning documentarian), but TO SEE IF I'M SMILING asks the audience to question whether they would perform their tasks any differently. Can you tell the difference between a woman on her way to the market and a man in a burqa with a bomb? And does the very act of having to ask such questions steal a small piece of your humanity?
On the surface, SONG SUNG BLUE is less weighty. It is, after all, the story of a cover band, albeit a compelling and locally (if your locality is Milwaukee) famed cover band - a duo known as Lightning & Thunder. Together, they could help you get your retro groove on as Lightning delivers a mean Neil Diamond impression, while girlfriend-later-wife Thunder can karaoke to Patsy Cline with the best of them. But underneath the Kiki and Herb, Marty and Elaine subject matter is a a more serious concern, not unlike that explored recently by ANVIL: THE STORY OF ANVIL (which I wrote about here after its Sundance premiere and which opened Hot Docs last week) - how does one continue to practice art as one ages and the deck is more often stacked against you than not.
The first 30 minutes of SONG SUNG BLUE are insightful, funny and profound. Lightning is an amazing documentary character, a talented man who has chosen a career (tribute artist) than has a seemingly obvious ceiling. Yet for both Thunder and Lightning, acclaim is right around the corner, no matter the personal and professional tragedies that may befall them.
For me, the momentum shifted a bit once the film entered a more traditional "dysfunctional family" storyline, draining some of the energy that I felt in the film's first act. But filmmaker Greg Kohs has tremendous access and a wealth of archival footage and shows the benefit of following a story for years. A lesser filmmaker might have pulled the plug or finished prematurely, but Kohs is present and ready for the film's unexpectedly emotional denouement.
As the film progresses, we discover that Lightning has war scars of his own, although these tales of Vietnam are told by friends and acquaintances. He is not, however, caught in the same predicament as AT THE DEATH HOUSE DOOR's Pickett. Like Anvil lead singer Lips Ludlow, Lightning is more apt to lash out, ready to tell his tale of woe to whoever's listening, yet still optimistically believing that this time, everything will be different.
But while ANVIL rewards its subjects with a happy ending, SONG SUNG BLUE is content to explore one man and woman and their struggling spirits. If the most heroic character in BLUE is Pearl Jam's Eddie Vedder (proving again that Kurt Cobain was wrong about him), that's OK. Sometimes dreams don't come true in the ways that we expect.
Can Rev. Carroll Pickett be trusted "At the Death House Door"?
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
Rev. Pickett is on a promotional tour for the anti death penalty film "At the Death House Door". It is partially about the Reverend's experience ministering to 95 death row inmates executed in Texas.
Rev. Pickett's inaccuracies are many and important.
Does Rev. Pickett just make facts up as he goes along, hoping that no one fact checks, or is he just confused or ignorant?
Some of his miscues are common anti death penalty deceptions. The reverend is an anti death penalty activist.
Below are comments or paraphrases of Rev. Pickett, taken from interviews, followed by my Reply:.
1) Pickett: I knew (executed inmate) Carlos (De Luna) didn't do it. It was his big brown eyes, the way he talked, he was the same age as my son (transference). I felt so sympathetic towards him. I was so 100% certain that he couldn't have committed this crime. (Carlos) was a super person to minister to. I knew Carlos was not guilty. Fred Allen a guard, said "by the way he talks and acts I don't believe he is guilty, either. (1)
REPLY: Experienced prison personnel are fooled all the time by prisoners, just as parole boards are. This is simply Rev. Pickett's and Fred Allen's blind speculation and nothing more.
More than that, it appears that Rev. Pickett is, now, either lying about his own opinions or he is very confused. Read on.
2) Pickett: believes that, no way, could someone, so afraid of lightning and thunder, such as Carlos De Luna, use a knife (in a crime). (1)
Reply: Rev. Pickett talks about how important his background is in understanding people and behavior and he says something like this, destroying his own credibility on the issue. If the lightning and thunder event occurred, we already know what De Luna was capable of. In 1980, "De Luna was charged with attempted aggravated rape and driving a stolen vehicle, he pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 2 to 3 years. Paroled in May 1982, De Luna returned to Corpus Christi. Not long after, he attended a party for a former cellmate and was accused of attacking the cellmate's 53-year-old mother. She told police that De Luna broke three of her ribs with one punch, removed her underwear, pulled down his pants, then suddenly left. He was never prosecuted for the attack, but authorities sent him back to prison on a parole violation. Released again in December of that year, he came back to Corpus Christi and got a job as a concrete worker. Almost immediately, he was arrested for public intoxication. During the arrest, De Luna allegedly laughed about the wounding of a police officer months earlier and said the officer should have been killed. Two weeks after that arrest, Lopez was murdered." (Chicago Tribune) Being a long time criminal, we can presume that there were numerous additional crimes committed by De Luna and which remained unsolved. Was De Luna capable of committing a robbery murder, even though he had big brown eyes and was scared of lightning? Of course. This goes to Rev. Pickett's poor judgement or something else.
There is this major problem.
In 1999, years after Rev. Pickett had left his death row ministry, and 10 years after De Luna's execution, the reverend was asked, in a PBS Frontline interview, "Do you think there have been some you have watched die who were strictly innocent?"
His reply: "I never felt that." (3)
For many years, and since the 1989 execution of Carlos De Luna, the reverend never felt that any of the 95 executed were actually innocent.
This directly conflicts with his current statements on Carlos De Luna. Rev. Pickett is, now, saying that he was 100% sure of De Luna's innocence in 1989!
It appears the reverend has either revised history to support his new anti death penalty activism - he's lying - or he is, again, very confused. Reverend?
3) Introduction: In 1974, prison librarian Judy Standley and teacher Von Beseda were murdered during an 11 day prison siege and escape attempt. Ignacio Cuevas was sentenced to death, as one of three prisoners who were involved. The other two died in the shootout.
Ms. Standley and Ms. Beseda were part of Rev. Pickett's congregation, outside of prison.
Pickett: After Cuevas was executed, Rev. Pickett alleges that he met with Judy Standley's family and they told the reverend that "This (the execution) didn't bring closure." "This didn't help us." According to Rev. Pickett, "They didn't want him (Ignacio Cuevas) executed." (1)
Reply; There might be a big problem. Judy Standley's five children wrote a statement, before the execution, which stated: "We are relieved the ordeal may almost be over, but we are also aware that to some, this case represents only one of many in which, arguably, `justice delayed is justice denied," "We are hopeful the sentence will finally be carried out and that justice will at last be served," said the statement, signed by Ty, Dru, Mark, Pam and Stuart Standley. (4)
Sure seemed like the kids wanted Cuevas to be executed. Doesn't it? Reverend?
4) Pickett: "A great majority of them (the 95 executed inmates he ministered to) were black or Hispanic." (1)
Reply: The reverend's point, here, is to emphasize the alleged racist nature of the death penalty. There is a problem for the reverend - the facts - the "great majority" were 47 white (49%) with 32 black (34%), and 16 Hispanic (17%).
5) Pickett: "Out of the 95 we executed only one that had a college degree. All the rest of them their education was 9th grade and under." (1)
Reply: Not even close. Rev. Pickett's point, here, seems to be that capital murderers are, almost all, idiots who can't be held responsible for their actions. But, there are more fact problems for the reverend. In a review of only 31 of the 95 cases, 5 had some college or post graduate classes and 16 were high school graduates or completed their GED. Partial review (Incomplete Count) , below.
Would Rev. Pickett tell us about the educational achievements of all the true innocent murder victims and those that weren't old enough for school?
6) Pickett: spoke of the Soldier of Fortune murder for hire case, stating the husband got the death penalt, while the hired murderer got 6 years. (1)
Reply: Rev. Pickett's point, here, was the unfairness of the sentence disparity. More fact problems. John Wayne Hearn, the hitman, was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Sandra Black.
7) Pickett: speaks of how sincere hostage taker, murderer Ignacio Cuevas was. Rev. Pickett states that "between 11 and midnight (I) believe almost everything" the inmates say, because they are about to be executed. (1)
Reply: Bad judgement. Minutes later, Cuevas lied when on the gurney, stating that he was innocent. This goes to show how Rev. Pickett and many others are easily fooled by these murderers. Pickett concedes the point.
8) Pickett: "In my opinion and in the opinion of the convicts, life in prison, with no hope of parole, is a much worse punishment (than the death penalty)." "Most of these people (death row inmates) fear life in prison more than they do the possibility of execution." (2)
REPLY: More fact problems. We know that isn't the opinion of those facing a possible death sentence of those residing on death row. This gives more support to my suspicion that Rev. Pickett is putting words into the inmates' mouths.
Facts: What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence, rather than seeking a life sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment. What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment. What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero (less than 2%). They prefer long term imprisonment. This is not, even remotely, in dispute. How could Rev. Pickett not be aware of this? How long was he ministering to Texas' death row? 13 years?
9) Pickett: stated that "doctors can't (check the veins of inmates pending execution), it's against the law." (1)
Reply: Ridiculous. Obviously untrue.
10) Pickett: Pavulon (a paralytic) has been banned by vets but we use it on people. (1)
REPLY: This is untrue and is a common anti death penalty deception. The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) stetes, "When used alone, these drugs (paralytics) all cause respiratory arrest before loss of consciousness, so the animal may perceive pain and distress after it is immobilized." Obviously, paralytics are never used alone in the human lethal injection process or animal euthanasia. The AVMA does not mention the specific paralytic - Pavulon - used in lethal injection for humans. These absurd claims, falsely attributed to veterinary literature, have been a bald faced lie by anti death penalty activists.
In Belgium and the Netherlands, their euthanasia protocol is as follows: A coma is first induced by intravenous administration of 20 mg/kg sodium thiopental (Nesdonal) (NOTE-the first drug in human lethal injection) in a small volume (10 ml physiological saline). Then a triple intravenous dose of a non-depolarizing neuromuscular muscle relaxant is given, such as 20 mg pancuronium bromide (Pavulon) (NOTE-the second drug, the paralytic, in human lethal injection) or 20 mg vecuronium bromide (Norcuron). The muscle relaxant should preferably be given intravenously, in order to ensure optimal availability (NOTE: as in human lethal injection). Only for pancuronium bromide (Pavulon) are there substantial indications that the agent may also be given intramuscularly in a dosage of 40 mg. (NOTE: That is how effective the second drug in human lethal injection is, that it can be given intramuscularly and still hasten death).
Just like execution/lethal injection in the US, although we give a third drug which speeds up death, even more.
11) Pickett: "Most of the inmates would ask the question, "How can Texas kill people who kill people and tell people that killing people is wrong?" That came out of inmates’ mouths regularly and I think it’s a pretty good question to ask." (2)
REPLY: Most? Would that be more than 47 out of 95? I simply don't believe it. 10 out of 95? Doubtful. I suspect it is no coincidence that "Why do we kill people to show that killing is wrong" has been a common anti death penalty slogan for a very long time. I suspect that Rev. Pickett has just picked it up, used it and placed it in inmate's mouths. Furthermore, we don't execute murderers to show that murder is wrong. Most folks know that murder is wrong even without a sanction.
12) Pickett: said an inmate said "its burning" "its burning", during an execution. (1)
REPLY: This may have occurred for a variety of reasons and does not appear to be an issue. It is the third drug which is noted for a burning sensation, if one were conscious during its injection. However, none of the inmates that Rev. Pickett handled were conscious after the first drug was administered. That would not be the case, here, as the burning complaints came at the very beginning of the injection process, which would involve a reaction where the burning would be quite minor. Has Rev. Pickett reviewed the pain and suffering of the real victims - the innocent murdered ones?
Bottom line. Reverend Pickett's credibility is as high as a snakes belly.
Time to edit the movie?!
------------
Incomplete count
this is a review of 31 out of the 95 death row inmates ministered by Rev. Pickett
21 of the 31 below had some college or post graduate classes (5)
or were high school graduates or completed their GED (16)
-----------
1) Brooks 12
3) O'Bryan post graduate degree - dentist
41 james russel 10th
42 G Green sophomore college
45 David Clark 10th and GED
46 Edward Ellis 10th
47 Billy White 10th
48 Justin May 11th
49 Jesus Romero 11th and GED
50 Robert Black, Jr. a pilot (probably beyond 12th)
55. Carlos Santana 11th
57 Darryl Stewart 12th
58 Leonel Herrera 11th and GED
60) Markum Duff Smith Post graduate College
33) Carlos De Luna 9th
95 Ronald Keith Allridge 10th and GED
93 Noble Mays Junior in College
92 Samuel Hawkins 12th
91 Billy Conn Gardner 12th
90 Jeffery Dean Motley 9th
89 Willie Ray Williams 11th
86 Jesse Jacobs 12th
85 Raymond Carl Kinnamon 11th and GED
84 Herman Clark sophomore college
83 Warren Eugene Bridge 11th
82 Walter Key Williams 12th
72 Harold Barnard 12th
73 Freddie Webb 11th and GED
75 Larry Anderson 12th
77 Stephen Nethery 12th
79 Robert Drew 10th
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Pro death penalty sites
homicidesurvivors(dot)com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx
www(dot)dpinfo.com
www(dot)cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
www(dot)clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
www(dot)coastda.com/archives.html
www(dot)lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
www(dot)prodeathpenalty.com
www(dot)yesdeathpenalty.com/deathpenalty_co
yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2 (Sweden)
www(dot)wesleylowe.com/cp.html
1) "Chaplain Discusses 'Death House' Ministry", Interview, Legal Affairs, FRESH AIR, NPR, May 19, 2007.
2) THE FAILURE INTERVIEW: REVEREND CARROLL PICKETT—AUTHOR OF "WITHIN THESE WALLS: MEMOIRS OF A DEATH HOUSE CHAPLAIN" Interview, by Kathleen A. Ervin
www(DOT)failuremag.com/arch_history_carroll_pickett_interview.html
3) "The Execution: Interview with Reverend Carroll Pickett", PBS, FRONTLINE, 1999
www(DOT)pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/execution/readings/pickett.html
4) "Appellate court refuses to stay killer's execution", Kathy Fair, HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Section A, Page 1, 2 Star edition, 05/23/1991
Posted by: Dudley Sharp | May 24, 2008 at 01:17 PM
It is clear that Mr. Sharp has not seen AT THE DEATH HOUSE DOOR as some of his comments on Rev. Pickett are refuted quite clearly and with evidence in the film. For one, there is the audio tape that Pickett recorded the night of De Luna's execution, in which he talks about his doubts that De Luna committed the crime for which he was put to death. No matter what one thinks of the death penalty, Mr. Sharp makes the common mistake of demagogues: he criticizes someone for having no credibility without having any regard for an honest portrayal of the facts.
Posted by: AJ Schnack | May 24, 2008 at 01:26 PM
First, tell me where I haven't had an honest portrayal of the facts.
Fact:
In 1999, from Rev. Pickett on PBS' Frontline interview, he states he never felt that any of the 95 executed were innocent. 1999.
DeLuna was executed in 1989.
Odd. Pickett become a vocal anti death penalty activist in 1995. Today, Pickett states that he was 100% sure of DeLuna's innocence in 1989.
Yet, in 1999, four years into his anti death penalty activism, he forgets the only inmate he was sure was an innocent executed.
Forgets? That hardly seems plausible,
Allegedly, Pickett even made a tape in 1989 about the innocent executed and he still "forgets" about it in a 1999 interview.
When is the first confirmable statement by Rev. Pickett that he believed, 100%, that DeLuna was an innocent executed.
Was it after the Chicago Tribune writers approached him?
No, I haven't seen the film. None of my references are from the film, which has its network debut, tonight.
Look at the footnotes.
Posted by: Dudley Sharp | May 29, 2008 at 02:14 PM
Exactly. You are criticizing a film that you haven't seen. You wrote, "Time to edit the movie?!" If you have an issue with Pickett - as you clearly do, because you are a pro-death penalty advocate - then it's your right to debate him on the facts. But your selective reading of select interviews has nothing to do with the information that is in AT THE DEATH HOUSE DOOR. Suggesting that the film - which you admit that you have not seen - is inaccurate or misleading, as you do by writing "Time to edit the movie?!", is not "an honest portrayal of the facts".
Posted by: AJ Schnack | May 29, 2008 at 03:24 PM