As the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission con­tin­ued its review of the state’s law, the Asbury Park Press called for replac­ing cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment with the sen­tence of life with­out parole. This would bet­ter serve the fam­i­lies of vic­tims, accord­ing to the edi­to­r­i­al, because the death penal­ty caus­es years of uncer­tain­ty with lit­tle prospect that the sen­tence will be car­ried out. The edi­to­r­i­al stat­ed:

Reasons to drop death penal­ty Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 09/​15/​06

State leg­is­la­tors need no fur­ther proof about the mer­its of the death penal­ty law than to lis­ten to the fam­i­lies of mur­der vic­tims. Their pain at the thought that their loved one’s killer can walk free after a suc­cess­ful appeal or at the end of his sen­tence should con­vince any wary law­mak­er that life with­out parole is a far bet­ter pun­ish­ment than a cell on death row.

Those cells have become the per­ma­nent home of New Jersey’s mur­der­ers as they await the out­comes of appeal after appeal to their death penal­ty sen­tences. As a result, no inmate — as heinous as his crime may have been — has been exe­cut­ed since the state restored the death penal­ty in 1982.

The Death Penalty Study Commission con­duct­ed a hear­ing Wednesday on whether to rec­om­mend changes to the law to the Legislature. The answer is clear­ly ​“yes,” with life with­out parole the best alternative.

That would spare Joanne Barlieb of Atco the fear that her moth­er’s killer in a 1985 con­ve­nience store rob­bery could be free and on the streets in 14 years. ​“Our fam­i­ly was forced to relive the night­mare three times,” Barlieb told the pan­el of their courtroom appearances.

That penal­ty would also mean that Robert O. Marshall, 66, of Dover Township, would not be eli­gi­ble for parole in eight years for his role in the con­tract mur­der of his wife in 1984. ​“Marshall not only has escaped the death penal­ty, but he will prob­a­bly see free­dom in time to enjoy it,” said Richard Pompelio, direc­tor of a vic­tims’ rights organization.

Marshall was resen­tenced to life in prison with parole eli­gi­bil­i­ty in 2014 after judges, in one of Marshall’s numer­ous appeals, ruled that his defense was inad­e­quate dur­ing the death penalty phase.

One leg­is­la­tor, Sen. Robert Martin, R‑Morris, told the com­mis­sion that the death penal­ty should be abol­ished. Fine-tun­ing it has­n’t worked, Martin said. Instead, ​“it has erect­ed a night­mare for many of the vic­tims’ fam­i­lies,” he said.

All of these appeals cost mon­ey, which was cit­ed by Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D‑Union, as anoth­er rea­son to drop the law, which he sup­port­ed in 1982. Now adopt­ing the stance of death penal­ty oppo­nents, Lesniak also said ​“there is no fool­proof sys­tem to pre­vent the exe­cu­tion of an innocent person.”

The evi­dence against the death penal­ty law is con­vinc­ing. It has to go, with life with­out parole the sen­tence that serves jus­tice and the fam­i­lies left behind.

(Asbury Park Press, Sept. 15, 2006). See Editorials and Victims.

func­tion NewWindow(height,width,url) {window.open(url,“ShowProdWindow”,“menubars=0,scrollbars=1,resizable=1,height=”+ height+”,width=”+width); } <!– txtSizeBar(); //–

Citation Guide