Ron Tucker needs to calm down. He quotes Richard Kim:

In 2004, 97 percent of all known executions took place in China, Iran, Vietnam and the United States; in the number of juvenile executions since 1990, Iran ranks second (fourteen) to the United States (nineteen) which just this past March categorically banned the death penalty for those under 18.

and then complains: "...the US has not executed a minor since Leonard Shockley in 1959 and has not executed anyone even under 19 since 1964."

If he had more relaxed while reading this, he might have realized that he had misconstrued the phrase "juvenile execution." In Richard Kim's article (and elsewhere: viz. the Washington Post) the phrase is clearly being used to denote the execution of a person for a crime that they committed while under their majority. That is, while they were juvenile offenders. Indeed, this usage is fairly common (as a brief glance through articles from the 2004 Supreme Court decision show).

Mr. Tucker also appears to have misunderstood Kim's rankings, for he responds to the claim that Iran is second after the United States in executions thus:

"In the last year that clear execution tallies are readily available the four offending nations which you mentioned that made up 97 percent of the world's executions were: China - 3,400; Iran (with less than a quarter of the population of the US) - 169 ;Vietnam - At least 122 known and likely many more (some claim only 69 but that figure is a first half of the year mark); The US - 60"

Presumably the enraged Mr. Tucker thought that this (uncited) group of figures refutes Kim's ranking that he quotes at the top of his response. However, Kim is writing about the number of executions performed on juvenile offenders and Thompson has given us a figure showing the total number of executions punkt. Mr. Tucker's condition here seems to be what people call "blind rage" ...

(Incidentally, had Mr. Tucker looked a few years earlier, he would have seen that the number of executions in the United States was 98. One cannot help but think he was cherry-picking his data.)

In any case (setting aside Mr. Tucker's nonsense for the moment) I remember reading about this case when it first occurred. I thought to look for information on it again after listening to the recent speech by Ahmadinejad at Columbia and stumbled across this article by accident. I'm happy I did. Of course, it has the usual The Nation tangential "Boo! War!" elements (the vilification of Tatchell was pointless and hardly news, as was the amateurish armchair psychology about his motivations), but it doesn't appear to deliberately distort the facts.

To sum up, I guess I'm saying that Mr Tucker needs to spend less time outraged because then he writes dum dum.

And the death penalty is sickening.

Andrew James

Boston, MA

The article stated :

In 2004, 97 percent of all known executions took place in China, Iran, Vietnam and the United States; in the number of juvenile executions since 1990, Iran ranks second (fourteen) to the United States (nineteen) which just this past March categorically banned the death penalty for those under 18.

First, the US has not executed a minor since Leonard Shockley in 1959 and has not executed anyone even under 19 since 1964. In the last year that clear execution tallies are readily available, the four offending nations that you mentioned as making up 97 percent of the world's executions were:

China - 3,400;
Iran (with less than a quarter of the population of the US) - 169;
Vietnam - at least 122 known and likely many more
 (some claim only 69 but that figure is at the first half of the year mark); The US - 60

Per capita the US is far down the list and has far fewer capital offenses than most any nation. Most executions occur in socialist/communist nations and Islamic nations under shira law.

Your article distorts the facts and makes it appear that the American application of capital punishment is on a level with that of Iran. I suppose this was typically deliberate.

Ron Tucker

Monroe, GA