The News & Record of North Carolina recent­ly fea­tured an edi­to­r­i­al encour­ag­ing the state’s leg­is­la­ture and gov­er­nor to abol­ish the death penal­ty. The edi­to­r­i­al not­ed the con­tro­ver­sies that have sur­round­ed the use of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment in the state, includ­ing dis­agree­ment about lethal injec­tions and the incon­sis­tent way the penal­ty has been applied. The declin­ing num­ber of death sen­tences and the exten­sive time need­ed before an exe­cu­tion can take place led the paper to con­clude the state ​“should do away with the death penal­ty and con­vert the sen­tence of every con­demned pris­on­er to life with­out parole.” The paper not­ed that many of the peo­ple who are on the state’s death row would prob­a­bly not be giv­en a death sen­tence today because of chang­ing atti­tudes and high­er stan­dards of rep­re­sen­ta­tion. Abolition, the edi­tors said, ​“will put an end to death-sen­tence appeals, elim­i­nate incon­sis­ten­cies, ease the med­ical con­flict, and bring the law into line with the way the courts apply it in almost every case.”

The full edi­to­r­i­al may be found below:

News & Record
Editorial: A penal­ty of the past

Gov. Mike Easley raised a point­ed ques­tion about crime and pun­ish­ment:

​‘When are we going to hold some of these peo­ple account­able and get some of these exe­cu­tions going again? That’s what I want to know,’ the gov­er­nor said to N&R reporter Mark Binker in an inter­view last month.

It won’t hap­pen on Easley’s watch. His term expires Saturday. Whether the state’s exe­cu­tion cham­ber gets busy again dur­ing the tenure of the next gov­er­nor, Bev Perdue, remains to be seen. She also sup­ports cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, although prob­a­bly not as impa­tient­ly as Easley.

If she and leg­isla­tive lead­ers are wise, how­ev­er, they’ll find a way out of North Carolina’s death-penal­ty dilem­ma.

Attitudes and appli­ca­tions are chang­ing. Nothing could show this more dra­mat­i­cal­ly than the fact that only one con­vict­ed mur­der­er was sen­tenced to death in North Carolina dur­ing 2008.

That con­tin­ues a down­ward trend, and it demon­strates that juries are increas­ing­ly uncom­fort­able with the death penal­ty and more con­fi­dent in the alter­na­tive of life in prison with­out parole. Easley might be eager for exe­cu­tions to get going again, but the men and women who serve on juries don’t share his fer­vor.

Exceptions are pos­si­ble. The killing of UNC stu­dent Eve Carson last March might be a case where a jury rec­om­mends the death penal­ty, but that crime gen­er­at­ed extra­or­di­nary atten­tion and sym­pa­thy for the vic­tim. Much more often, juries show restraint or pros­e­cu­tors accept a guilty plea in exchange for a life sen­tence.

This cre­ates an obvi­ous inequity. There are 162 inmates on North Carolina’s Death Row. Most were put there under stan­dards in place 10 or 15 years ago or longer. If tried for the same offens­es today, most prob­a­bly would not be sen­tenced to death. It’s not that their crimes weren’t heinous; rather, life in prison usu­al­ly is seen now as the most appro­pri­ate pun­ish­ment.

Executions in North Carolina have been stalled for more than two years for a dif­fer­ent rea­son. State law requires a physi­cian to attend each exe­cu­tion, but the N.C. Medical Board for­bids it. The impasse is wait­ing for res­o­lu­tion by the state Supreme Court.

This has cre­at­ed a dis­grace­ful con­flict, with state author­i­ties try­ing to force an orga­ni­za­tion of pro­fes­sion­al heal­ers to aban­don med­ical ethics.

The way out is clear. The leg­is­la­ture and gov­er­nor — Perdue, not Easley — should do away with the death penal­ty and con­vert the sen­tence of every con­demned pris­on­er to life with­out parole. That will put an end to death-sen­tence appeals, elim­i­nate incon­sis­ten­cies, ease the med­ical con­flict and bring the law into line with the way the courts apply it in almost every case.

Easley asks when exe­cu­tions will get going again, but juries are speak­ing. They rarely see the death penal­ty as the state’s best response any­more, even to ter­ri­ble crimes.

Is any­one lis­ten­ing? Juries are mak­ing more sense than the out­go­ing gov­er­nor.

(“Editorial: A penal­ty of the past,” The News & Record, January 4, 2008). See Editorials.

Citation Guide