Commenting on the recent halt­ing of exe­cu­tions over the lethal injec­tion con­tro­ver­sy and DPIC’s Year End Report, the Boston Globe raised the ques­tion of ​“whether exe­cu­tion by any method is right.” Their edi­to­r­i­al con­clud­ed that “[t]his hit-and-miss sys­tem offers no pro­tec­tion for soci­ety,” and stat­ed that a life-with­out parole alter­na­tive would ​“pro­tect soci­ety while allow­ing for redress if a pris­on­er could show he was wrong­ly con­vict­ed. A ban on exe­cu­tions would spare judges and juries from hav­ing to con­sid­er whether men­tal ill­ness, age, or oth­er mit­i­gat­ing cir­cum­stance should pre­clude a death sen­tence. The legal sys­tem can­not make these Solomonic deci­sions with assur­ance of a just out­come.“

The entire editorial follows:

Rethinking the death penal­ty

THE UNITED STATES may be slow­ly rid­ding itself of the urge to impose the death penal­ty, accord­ing to a study released last week. A pro­tract­ed exe­cu­tion in Florida on Wednesday stark­ly illus­trat­ed one of the rea­sons for the change in attitude.

Angel Diaz was the 53d and last per­son to be exe­cut­ed in the United States this year. He was strapped onto a gur­ney and giv­en an injec­tion that was sup­posed to kill him with­in 15 min­utes, but he lay there squint­ing and gri­mac­ing, and seemed to be try­ing to speak. Prison offi­cials had to give him a sec­ond injec­tion, and it took him 34 min­utes to die. .

Governor Jeb Bush promised an inves­ti­ga­tion and sus­pend­ed exe­cu­tions pend­ing the results, but the exact rea­son for Diaz’s ordeal ignores the wider ques­tion of whether exe­cu­tion by any method is right. The mur­der took place in 1979, and any deter­rent effect has van­ished. Thousands of peo­ple have been mur­dered in the state since then, yet only 64 have been exe­cut­ed. This hit-and-miss sys­tem offers no pro­tec­tion for society.

Other states are start­ing to accept this real­i­ty, accord­ing to a sur­vey by the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C. The 53 exe­cu­tions this year are down from 60 the year before, and 98 in 1999. The New Jersey Legislature imposed a mora­to­ri­um on exe­cu­tions, and North Carolina and California began leg­isla­tive stud­ies of their sys­tems. The issue gained urgency in Califonia last week when a fed­er­al judge ruled that the injec­tion pro­ce­dures fol­lowed there were so cru­el that they vio­lat­ed the US Constitution.

Based on the Florida expe­ri­ence, it’s easy to under­stand why states are wary. Florida aban­doned the elec­tric chair in 2000 in favor of lethal injec­tions, but Diaz’s pro­longed death shows this method to be sim­i­lar­ly inhu­mane. Even if a pain­less sys­tem were devised, the vari­a­tion of sen­tenc­ing across mul­ti­ple juris­dic­tions is inherently arbitrary.

Support for cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment remains steady at two-thirds of those polled nation­al­ly, but when details are pro­vid­ed of the exe­cu­tions, that begins to erode. And when giv­en a choice of exe­cu­tion or life with­out parole, a slight major­i­ty in a recent Gallup Poll favored the life sen­tence. This pun­ish­ment would pro­tect soci­ety while allow­ing for redress if a pris­on­er could show he was wrong­ly con­vict­ed. A ban on exe­cu­tions would spare judges and juries from hav­ing to con­sid­er whether men­tal ill­ness, age, or oth­er mit­i­gat­ing cir­cum­stance should pre­clude a death sen­tence. The legal sys­tem can­not make these Solomonic deci­sions with assur­ance of a just outcome.

Before he died, Diaz called his exe­cu­tion an act of vengeance. Perhaps, but giv­en the 27-year lapse between crime and pun­ish­ment, there was no pub­lic out­cry for his death. His exe­cu­tion rather shows the capri­cious nature of a bru­tal act that should have no place in American society.

(Boston Globe, Dec. 19, 2006). See Editorials and Arbitrariness.

Citation Guide