In a recent editorial, the Delaware News Journal concluded that the uncertainties and delays of the death penalty favor ending the system and replacing it with a sentence of life without parole. Such a system would better serve victims and their families, and bring swifter justice:

The latest argument over the death penalty centers on a seemingly simple question: Is the current method of execution cruel and unusual punishment under the U.S. Constitution?

The Supreme Court eventually will answer, but not settle the question. Yet the debate is affecting states, including Delaware.
…
No matter how the argument turns out, it is anything but simple. What, after all, does cruel and usual punishment mean?
…

In the meantime, the families and friends of victims will suffer through every appeal and delay.

Society should end this system. Americans are too reluctant to eliminate or streamline appeals. For valid reasons, they are afraid of being hasty and killing an innocent man. On the hand, the long, costly process robs the death penalty of any deterrent effect.

Put murderers away for life. Take away any chance of parole or release.

Such a policy will never replace the lost victims or fully comfort their families. But it will keep them from having to relive murders with every appeal. And it will give respect to the idea of swift and sure justice.

(Delaware News Journal, July 28, 2006). See Editorials and Life Without Parole.