New Jersey to repeal death penalty

[redbull]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...=moreheadlines

N.J. General Assembly Votes to Repeal Death Penalty
Thursday, December 13, 2007; 5:29 p.m.
By Keith B. Richburg Washington Post Staff Writer

NEW YORK, Dec. 13 -- New Jersey is set to become the first state to legislatively abolish the death penalty since the Supreme Court restored it in the mid-1970s. Opponents of capital punishment hope the state's action may prompt a rethinking of the moral and practical implications of the practice in other states.

New Jersey's Democratic-controlled General Assembly voted 44 to 36 to repeal the death penalty and replace it with life in prison without parole. The action followed a similar vote by the Senate on Monday. Gov. Jon S. Corzine, a Democrat and a death penalty opponent, has said he would sign the legislation.

The repeal bill follows the recommendation of a state commission that reported in January that the death penalty "is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency." But equally persuasive to lawmakers was not saving lives but money -- it costs more to keep a prisoner indefinitely on death row than incarcerated for life.

In some states, governors have blocked executions or state supreme courts have declared effective moratoriums. Several states legislatures -- including in Maryland, Montana, New Mexico and Nebraska -- have debated bills this year to abolish capital punishment, but none so far has succeeded. Only in 2000, in New Hampshire, did the state legislature vote to repeal capital punishment, but the bill was vetoed by then-Gov.Jeanne Shaheen (D).

The U.S. Supreme Court has effectively declared a moratorium on executions since it decided to take up in this term the question of whether lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. In recent decisions, the high court has narrowed the use of capital punishment, ruling that it is unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded or those who committed crimes as juveniles.

The repeal movement in New Jersey gained ground this year despite solid public support in the state for capital punishment, and over the objections of death penalty supporters who accused lawmakers of rushing the issue through a lame duck session before a new legislature is installed next year.

"It's a rush to judgment" said Robert Blecker, a New York Law School professor and prominent death penalty advocate.

Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, hailed the New Jersey vote as "a first. But it is coming at a time when there is a reexamination of the death penalty going on." Dieter added, "It does give other legislatures the chance to say, is this working in our state?"

The repeal comes despite the pleas of some high profile victims, such as Richard and Maureen Kanka, whose 7-year-old daughter, Megan, was killed by a repeat sex offender, Jesse K. Timmendequas, who is currently on New Jersey's death row. Megan Kanka's brutal 1994 killing gave rise to "Megan's law," requiring public notification when a convicted sex offender moves into a neighborhood.

Public opinion across the United States still remains solidly in favor of capital punishment, with 62 percent supporting the death penalty for murderers and 32 percent opposed, according to January polling figures by the Pew Research Center in Washington. And in New Jersey, the most recent poll this week released by Quinnipiac University Polling Institute showed that New Jersey residents opposed abolishing the death penalty 53 percent to 39 percent.

Where there is a discernable shift underway -- and what has partly driven the repeal in New Jersey -- is when residents are offered an alternative: the death penalty, or life in prison without parole. Given the choice, New Jersey residents backed life without parole over the death penalty by a nearly identical 52 percent to 39 percent margin.

"We have polls going back 10 years showing New Jerseyans favor the death penalty by about a 10percent margin," said Clay F. Richards, the Quinnipiac institute's assistant director. "The presence of life without parole changes the picture entirely."

"People want justice, not revenge," Richards said. He said when the concept of a life penalty without parole was first introduced some years ago, "people didn't trust it, because they saw so many murderers being paroled."

Besides the new possibility of prisons keeping murderers behind bars for life, repeal advocates also note that advances in DNA evidence has gotten scores of convicted murderers released from death row. And there were botched executions in Florida and Ohio. There has been debate lively in a slew of academic studies about the death penalty's effectiveness as a deterrent to crime. And politicians in some Northeastern states, such as New York and New Jersey, have found that there was no longer much of a political price to pay at the ballot box by being staunchly anti-death penalty.

In New Jersey, an added rationale for death penalty opponents was the simplest: It wasn't being used.

The state's last execution was in 1963. New Jersey reinstated the death penalty in 1982, following the Supreme Court's landmark 1976 ruling that allowed states to carry it out. But since then, the only inmate ever killed on New Jersey's death row was Robert "Mudman" Simon, a white supremacist and murderer who was stomped to death by another death row prisoner, Ambrose Harris, who is facing a death sentence for the 1992 rape and murder of a New Jersey artist.

The eight prisoners now languishing on New Jersey's death row are straight from the headlines of some of the state's most sensational crimes of the 1990s. Besides Harris, there is John Martini, who kidnapped local businessman Irving Flax from his home and shot him three times in the back of the head after receiving $25,000 in ransom money. There is Brian Wakefeld who forced his way into the Atlantic City home of retiree Richard Hazard and his wife Shirley, beat and stabbed them both and set their bodies on fire before going on a spending spree for compact discs, liquor and jewelry with the couple's stolen credit cards.

Flax's widow Marilyn, and the Hazard's daughter, Sharon Hazard-Johnson, testified against the repeal before the study commission, urging that the death penalty actually be implemented.

"What I would like this commission to do is not change the law, but enforce the law," Marilyn Flax told the commission.

In the end, the most compelling case for New Jersey lawmakers was the economic one. Keeping inmates on death row costs the state $72,602 per year for each prisoner. Inmates kept in the general population cost just $40,121 per year each to house.

The corrections department estimated that repeal could save the state up to $1.3 million per inmate over the inmate's lifetime -- and that figure did not ******* the millions spent by public defenders on numerous appeals.

good for them.

[jczeroman]

There is only one state that has banned the death penalty? That is insane!

[Corganist]

Note to self: If you ever want to heinously murder someone, do it in New Jersey.

[Debaser]

Because potential murderers care whether or not they might get the death penalty? Somehow I doubt it.

Can somebody look up the murder rate of modern industrialized countries that have no death penalty and compare them to here?

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Because potential murderers care whether or not they might get the death penalty? Somehow I doubt it.

Maybe not potential murderers...but I imagine the actual murderers care about it quite a bit.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Corganist

Maybe not potential murderers...but I imagine the actual murderers care about it quite a bit.

but by then its too late. they were not deterred.

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by Debaser

but by then its too late. they were not deterred.

If deterrence is the only thing that matters, why punish them at all?

[Chuck=Zero]

Hooray for Jersey...among the murderers who now don't have the weight of being executed hanging over their heads are a man who raped and murdered a seven year old girl and a man who killed an elderly couple in their house and then burned their bodies. I've never bought the idea that capital punishment makes potential murderers think twice and reduces murder rates, and I've never been against the death penalty because of religious beliefs. The only beef I've ever had with it is the fact that our legal system is far from infallible, this is especially evident now seeing all the convictions in recent years that have been overturned due to DNA evidence. But as for the true killers on death row, I don't give a fuck about their lives.

[dudehitscar]

I don't think capital punishment deters crime. I don't think capital punishment is the most effective way to punish someone. I do support capital punishment though because is more humane and just in a lot of ways then putting the criminal in a max security prison for the rest of his days while the taxpayers feed and cloth them.

[dudehitscar]

Certainly the dna turnovers have raised questions about the process of being convicted but I don't think that reflects on the general concept of a death penalty.


Thankfully we have dna evidence now and though it couldn't convict OJ it does wonders for our justice system. IMHO.

[Nimrod's Son]

the death penalty "is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency."

Yep. We're becoming a nation full of pussies who won't kill anything and won't fight wars without wondering how the enemy is "feeling," so we lose.

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by dudehitscar

I don't think capital punishment deters crime. I don't think capital punishment is the most effective way to punish someone. I do support capital punishment though because is more humane and just in a lot of ways then putting the criminal in a max security prison for the rest of his days while the taxpayers feed and cloth them.

I generally agree. To me, the only con to the death penalty is it's irreversability, but I think the extent to which that's a factor has been pretty overstated. There has never been a confirmed case of an innocent person being executed in the US. Never. There've been some people who have spent time on death row before the system worked itself out, and perhaps a few cases where the guilt of the person executed was questionable at worst. That's hardly anything to consider a crisis, especially considering that criminal investigative techniques are only getting better and better.

Other than that, to me the death penalty serves the exact same ultimate purpose as life without parole in that it gets the bad guy out of society's hair. And it's always strange to me when people talk about how we shouldn't base criminal punishment on vengeance and then they pimp life without parole over the death penalty because it's a worse punishment. Sure, there's something to be said for making murderers think about what they've done, but I tend to think a guy could sit in a room for 50 years and never think about what he's done nearly as much as he does as those few minutes before the needle goes into his arm. I think that all things being equal (ie., if you know good and well someone is guilty), that execution furthers society's interests more effectively than life imprisonment.

[dudehitscar]

Originally Posted by Corganist

I generally agree. To me, the only con to the death penalty is it's irreversability, but I think the extent to which that's a factor has been pretty overstated. There has never been a confirmed case of an innocent person being executed in the US. Never. There've been some people who have spent time on death row before the system worked itself out, and perhaps a few cases where the guilt of the person executed was questionable at worst. That's hardly anything to consider a crisis, especially considering that criminal investigative techniques are only getting better and better.

Other than that, to me the death penalty serves the exact same ultimate purpose as life without parole in that it gets the bad guy out of society's hair. And it's always strange to me when people talk about how we shouldn't base criminal punishment on vengeance and then they pimp life without parole over the death penalty because it's a worse punishment. Sure, there's something to be said for making murderers think about what they've done, but I tend to think a guy could sit in a room for 50 years and never think about what he's done nearly as much as he does as those few minutes before the needle goes into his arm. I think that all things being equal (ie., if you know good and well someone is guilty), that execution furthers society's interests more effectively than life imprisonment.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Corganist

If deterrence is the only thing that matters, why punish them at all?

I was only picking on the deterrence meme because that's what pro-death penalty people use to justify it.

I guess I'll go out on a limb and say that, yeah, murderers should be punished.

So if you can agree that the death penalty is not a deterrent, then why have a death penalty?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by dudehitscar

I do support capital punishment though because is more humane and just in a lot of ways then putting the criminal in a max security prison for the rest of his days while the taxpayers feed and cloth them.

I think its a glaring hypocrisy. Killing is wrong, so we're going to punish you by...killing some more.

If I'm not mistaken I've heard that it's actually more expensive to put somebody to death than to jail them for life (due to the extremely long appeal process while on death row).

[AnnMarie727]

i dont believe in the death penalty either. God is the one who decides when we live and die

Originally Posted by Debaser

I think its a glaring hypocrisy. Killing is wrong, so we're going to punish you by...killing some more.

i agree

[dudehitscar]

Originally Posted by Debaser

I think its a glaring hypocrisy. Killing is wrong, so we're going to punish you by...killing some more.

If I'm not mistaken I've heard that it's actually more expensive to put somebody to death than to jail them for life (due to the extremely long appeal process while on death row).

Of course I've heard this too and if it is true I would reconsider my opinion. If you get the chance I would love to see those figures. Please don't go to a anti-death penalty website to get them.

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by Debaser

So if you can agree that the death penalty is not a deterrent, then why have a death penalty?

Basically for the reason I alluded to above. It gets bad people out of society for good and all but ensures that they face the ramifications of what they did in a very real and tangible way. Being locked in a cell for your whole life is by no means a good fate, but a guy is just as likely to spend that time proclaiming his innocence as he would reflecting on his crime. I don't really see the societal value in that, all other things being equal.

I mean, if you want to make a guy a complete societal non-entity, why not go the extra step (even at extra expense) to also make good and sure he's sorry for what he's done?

[I'm Hardcore]

and killing a man brings forth remorse?

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by I'm Hardcore

and killing a man brings forth remorse?

Why wouldn't it? At worst, he might just be sorry he got caught and is about to die for it...but that's more remorse than you'd get from a lot of lifers. It's not like being locked up for 35 years has made Charlie Manson beg for forgiveness for his crimes, for example.

Which brings me to another point: as long as a murderer is alive and in prison, he never is truly removed from society all the way. He can still write books, get mail, interact with the media, have a street named after him in France, etc. I don't see what society gets out even allowing these people the most minimal of outside contact.

[I'm Hardcore]

if you think that the idea of death scares the majority of prisoners into remorse, you are seriously deluded

[I'm Hardcore]

and besides, what does remorse have to do with it?

saying sorry doesnt get you out of jail any quicker. these murderers are still the "bad people of society", as you call them.

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by I'm Hardcore

if you think that the idea of death scares the majority of prisoners into remorse, you are seriously deluded

What's so delusional about thinking that a guy might say "Holy shit, maybe I shouldn't have killed that person" when he's strapped down and the needle is going in his arm?

I admit I'm just speculating here, but I don't see what's so objectionable about it. I don't think that there's very many people out there at all who wouldn't be remorseful of something once it became completely clear that the chickens were coming home to roost.

[I'm Hardcore]

i said "the majority", and im standing by that. In no way does anything you say give any credibility to the death penalty

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally Posted by dudehitscar

Of course I've heard this too and if it is true I would reconsider my opinion. If you get the chance I would love to see those figures. Please don't go to a anti-death penalty website to get them.

It is true. I'm n ot going to find links for you, but I don't think getting rid of the penalty is the solution... just eliminate the lengthy appeals process

[I'm Hardcore]

killing people also gives them no chance of rehabilitation, so what good would being "sorry" be?

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by I'm Hardcore

and besides, what does remorse have to do with it?

saying sorry doesnt get you out of jail any quicker. these murderers are still the "bad people of society", as you call them.

It's one thing for society to wag it's finger at someone and say "You did wrong." It's quite another to make them know it. If the bad guys don't learn anything from their punishment, even if it's just for that split second before they die, then what's the point?

[I'm Hardcore]

HOW DOES SOCIETY BENEFIT FROM A GUY SHOWING REMORSE ONE SECOND BEFORE HIS DEATH

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by I'm Hardcore

i said "the majority", and im standing by that. In no way does anything you say give any credibility to the death penalty

I just don't think it's a tenable position. I'd be willing to allow that there might be a couple cold hard bastards on death row who'd curse their victim's name and say how glad they were they killed them even as the plunger was going down...but I think realistically that'd be a tiny tiny minority.

Maybe I'm just overestimating the humanity of people who commit capital crimes, but I think they fear death as much as the next guy.

[I'm Hardcore]

killers will be killers regardless of any looming punishment. the mere fact that they deal in such a trade proves to me how little disregard they have for death