The Death Penalty is not Justice --- For Anyone
|
In 1984 there were 122 murders in Connecticut. Of these, most were quickly resolved: the defendants pled guilty or were tried and sentenced. A few remained unsolved. One defendant, however, stayed in the limelight for twenty years, forcing the courts, the victims’ families and the entire state to revisit his crimes: Michael Ross. His case dragged on and only came to an end when, in a blaze of narcissistic glory, Ross waived his appeals and allowed himself to be executed in 2005. If he hadn’t done this, the case would still be working its way through the courts with no end in sight.
The Ross execution is important to remember as Connecticut deals with the aftermath of the murders of the Petit family in Cheshire. This horrible crime has produced loud calls for the death penalty, and the district attorney has said that he will seek it. Some of these calls are nothing more than a demand for bloody vengeance, no better than a call for a lynching. The majority, however, are driven by the belief that only an execution will provide justice for Dr. Petit and his family. Unfortunately, the fundamental flaw in the death penalty is that while it promises justice for all, it does not yield justice for anyone, especially for the families of the murder victims. Our legal system is designed to protect defendants, so much so that its critics accuse it of coddling murderers. However, this is not “coddling” but a necessary part of the system. Bob Barr, a conservative Republican and former congressman from Georgia recently put it this way: “As a proponent of our Constitution and its attendant Bill of Rights, I believe…strongly in the fundamental fairness that lies at the heart---or should lie at the heart---of our criminal justice system. Because of its obvious finality, the death penalty must be employed with as close to absolute fairness and certainty as humanly possible.” On the other hand, the victims’ families need a system that yields timely results: for them the old saying---“justice delayed is justice denied”---is especially true. A quick trial and sentencing provides a sense that order has been restored and lets them begin to rebuild their lives. But the system is anything but quick: the lengthy trial and sentencing are followed by years of appeals, and every court appearance causes new pain and forces them to relive their loss. District attorneys console the families throughout this ordeal by promising them that an execution, if and when it ever arrives, will bring “closure.” This itself is a cruel lie: as many family members have attested, the execution brings no magic relief and the pain and loss remain. There is no escaping this dilemma. Many states, particularly in the south, have attempted to provide quick justice, sacrificing fairness for speed. The price has been terrible injustice. Since 1976, 124 people on death row have been released because of innocence, and evidence has mounted that the innocent have been executed. Here in Connecticut we have avoided this trap, though the ordeal of James Tillman (who spent 18 years in prison for a rape he did not commit) should give us pause. Our price is that while most murders are quickly prosecuted, a small handful are turned into never-ending nightmares for the victims’ families. This happened in the Ross case, and more recently in the case of Jessie Campbell, who murdered two people in 2000. It has taken seven years, including two sentencing trials, to impose the death penalty. The legally mandated appeals process will now begin, and the families, will be forced to suffer for many more years. Victims’ families deserve better. “Tinkering with the machinery of death,” as Supreme Court Justice Blackmun said, will not help. The only solution that maintains the fundamental fairness of our system and provides them real, timely justice is to abolish the death penalty. Last year, after an exhaustive study, the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission concluded that “The alternative of life imprisonment in a maximum security institution without the possibility of parole would…ensure public safety and address other legitimate social…interests, including the interests of the families of murder victims.” Motivated by a desire to produce real justice for victims’ families, New Jersey is poised to abolish the death penalty. Connecticut law currently allows a sentence of life without release, and it means just that: no possibility of release. If the death penalty is taken off the table, then, when the perpetrators of the Petit murders are tried and convicted, the legal process will end, the guilty will be imprisoned, and the family can begin to move forward. Our criminal justice system failed them once; we should not let it fail them again. Before they or any other families are trapped, Connecticut should abolish the death penalty. Robert Nave
State/Regional Death Penalty Abolition Coordinator
Vice-Chairperson, National Steering Committee,
Executive Director |