10/27/06 Reject Unjust Death Penalty

Wisconsin State Journal

Friday, October 27, 2006
LINDA KETCHAM

On Nov. 7, Wisconsin voters will be asked whether to enact the death penalty for cases involving murderers, if the conviction is supported by DNA evidence.

Should Wisconsin, with one of the lowest homicide and overall violent crime rates in the country, join Texas, Oklahoma, and other death-penalty states?

While the DNA exception would seem to act as a safeguard against wrongful execution, referendum sponsor Sen. Alan Lasee, admitted to the State Journal that the DNA language was intended to win votes and that any actual legislation reinstating the death penalty might not include the DNA requirement.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, states without the death penalty generally have homicide rates below the national average. The gap between homicide rates in death penalty and non-death penalty states actually widened in 2003, from 36 percent in 2002 to 44 percent in 2003.

The death penalty is expensive. An Indiana study found the death penalty cost the state 35 percent to 37 percent more than if life without parole were the most severe penalty available.

The most compelling argument against the death penalty is the discriminatory nature in which it is meted out:

In court records of 502 murder cases from 1993-1997, researchers at the University of North Carolina found that race played a significant role in who was sentenced to death.

In Maryland, a comprehensive study commissioned by the governor concluded the state's death penalty was "tainted with racial bias," finding that defendants were much more likely to be sentenced to death if they had killed a white person than if they had killed an African American person.

The New Jersey Supreme Court found "unsettling statistical evidence indicating that cases involving killers of white victims more likely to progress to a penalty phase than cases involving killers of African American victims."

Former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, a death penalty supporter, declared a moratorium on the state's death penalty, finding its application immoral due to the lack of fairness and accuracy in administering.

Jury selection also offers opportunity for racial bias. The Supreme Court has noted that "the risk of racial prejudice infecting a capital sentencing proceeding is especially serious in light of the complete finality of the death sentence."

Requiring DNA evidence in death penalty sentencing will do nothing to ensure that race and poverty do not determine who is sentenced to death. Wisconsin ranks first in racial disparities in terms of incarceration. How will that disparity play out if the death penalty is enacted? Will we lead the country in racial disparities for people sentenced to death?

Is a system where people of color and the poor are disproportionately arrested, tried and convicted of crimes and sentenced to death a just system? Is a system in which racism and poverty play an undeniable role in sentencing decisions a just system? Can a society that supports such a system be considered a just society?