The St. Louis Post-Dispatch called upon lead­ers in Missouri to make numer­ous changes to the state’s death penal­ty in light of a recent American Bar Association report pro­duced by a bipar­ti­san pan­el of lawyers, judges, pros­e­cu­tors and law pro­fes­sors. The edi­to­r­i­al high­light­ed many of the ABA’s rec­om­men­da­tions, includ­ing improv­ing evi­dence stan­dards, increas­ing pub­lic defend­er fund­ing and cre­at­ing more account­abil­i­ty for pros­e­cu­tors.” It also not­ed that the ABA found that Missouri’s statute con­tains “[t]oo many aggra­vat­ing cir­cum­stances — 17 of them, many vague — that make the appli­ca­tion of the death penal­ty by pros­e­cu­tors arbi­trary. In Missouri, vir­tu­al­ly any mur­der case could qual­i­fy for the death penal­ty.” The edi­tors called on Governor Jay Nixon to address the lack of trans­paren­cy in the clemen­cy process: Mr. Nixon alone could make one move that would bring hon­or and jus­tice to the legal pro­fes­sion he loves with­out jeop­ar­diz­ing his stand­ing as a fierce death penal­ty pro­po­nent. He can com­mit to a trans­par­ent clemen­cy process for as long as he is gov­er­nor. It’s not good enough to spare one life while con­demn­ing anoth­er if the pub­lic does­n’t know the rea­son­ing behind either deci­sion.” Read full editorial below.

Editorial: Report cites numer­ous fail­ings in apply­ing death penalty

When Gov. Jay Nixon spared the life of killer Richard Clay last January, he, per­haps unwit­ting­ly, high­light­ed a key short­com­ing in how the death penal­ty is applied in Missouri.

Mr. Nixon decid­ed that Mr. Clay should­n’t die for the 1994 mur­der-for-hire of Randy Martindale in Missouri’s Bootheel, but he did­n’t say why.

At the time of Mr. Nixon’s deci­sion, a pan­el of dis­tin­guished Missouri legal schol­ars already was one year into an exhaus­tive study into whether the state’s appli­ca­tion of death penal­ty statutes com­plies with the American Bar Association’s pro­to­cols to ensure fair­ness and accuracy.

That report, which was released last week, found numer­ous, seri­ous prob­lems with how the death penal­ty is applied in Missouri. Among the find­ings is that the last step in the process, whether or not the gov­er­nor offers some form of clemen­cy, is not transparent.

The report, by a bipar­ti­san pan­el of lawyers, judges, pros­e­cu­tors and law pro­fes­sors, is more than 400 pages of detailed analy­sis of how Missouri applies the death penal­ty. The many prob­lems sup­port the argu­ments of death penal­ty oppo­nents, includ­ing this edi­to­r­i­al page, to put a stop to the prac­tice of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for men and women who might not have been guilty or might have been con­vict­ed of lesser crimes.

Among the key find­ings:
 — Missouri’s evi­dence rules are inad­e­quate to main­tain a high enough stan­dard of col­lec­tion, shar­ing and preser­va­tion of evi­dence, includ­ing DNA, to guar­an­tee that poten­tial­ly inno­cent death row inmates can take advan­tage of tech­no­log­i­cal advances.
 — A lack of strin­gent pro­to­col on wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion leads to a poten­tial for false tes­ti­mo­ny, and the lack of video­tap­ing of that crit­i­cal part of the inves­ti­ga­tion taints the process.
 — The under­fund­ed pub­lic defend­er sys­tem — 49th in the coun­try — lim­its the effec­tive­ness of coun­sel, par­tic­u­lar­ly when Missouri’s oth­er­wise strong cap­i­tal unit of the pub­lic defend­er office does­n’t get involved until very late in the process, when pros­e­cu­tors decide whether to seek the death penal­ty.
 — Too many aggra­vat­ing cir­cum­stances — 17 of them, many vague — that make the appli­ca­tion of the death penal­ty by pros­e­cu­tors arbi­trary. In Missouri, vir­tu­al­ly any mur­der case could qual­i­fy for the death penal­ty.
 — No active sys­tem of polic­ing pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al mis­con­duct, which recent­ly has been cit­ed in sev­er­al high-pro­file Missouri cas­es, includ­ing in the exon­er­a­tion of Joshua Kezer.

Most of these short­com­ings, and oth­ers, have been cit­ed by sup­port­ers of con­vict­ed killer Reggie Clemons, the man con­vict­ed of killing the Kerry sis­ters on the Chain of Rocks bridge in 1991. Mr. Clemons’ case is under court review. At some point, his case is like­ly to go to Mr. Nixon, who could, with a stroke of the pen and no pub­lic process, spare his life or send him to his death.

While Missouri’s ABA report does­n’t call for a mora­to­ri­um on the death penal­ty, as sim­i­lar reports have in sev­er­al oth­er states, it makes strong argu­ments that the state’s death penal­ty sys­tem is unjust. This is of par­tic­u­lar impor­tance in a state with the fourth-high­est rate of exe­cu­tions per death sen­tence in the coun­try, and the fifth-high­est rate of exe­cu­tions per capi­ta. We don’t have enough gate­keep­ers for the weak­est cas­es,” said St. Louis University law pro­fes­sor Stephen Thaman, a co-chair of the assess­ment team that includ­ed fed­er­al judge Stephen Limbaugh Jr.

Implementing the ABA report’s numer­ous rec­om­men­da­tions is a tall task. Some changes could be made by the court. Others, such as improv­ing evi­dence stan­dards, increas­ing pub­lic defend­er fund­ing and cre­at­ing more account­abil­i­ty for pros­e­cu­tors will be dif­fi­cult, if not impos­si­ble, in Missouri’s cur­rent political climate.

But Mr. Nixon alone could make one move that would bring hon­or and jus­tice to the legal pro­fes­sion he loves with­out jeop­ar­diz­ing his stand­ing as a fierce death penal­ty pro­po­nent. He can com­mit to a trans­par­ent clemen­cy process for as long as he is gov­er­nor. It’s not good enough to spare one life while con­demn­ing anoth­er if the pub­lic does­n’t know the rea­son­ing behind either decision.

Every man or woman on death row deserves a pub­lic air­ing of his or her case. Every deci­sion regard­ing the state’s immense pow­er to decide life or death deserves a trans­par­ent process so that, at the very least, there can be pub­lic con­fi­dence that the ulti­mate pun­ish­ment is applied fair­ly and accu­rate­ly to the most heinous killers.

That is not the case in Missouri today.

(“Editorial: Report cites numer­ous fail­ings in apply­ing death penal­ty,” in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, in stl​to​day​.com, March 7, 2012). See Clemency and more edi­to­ri­als about the death penalty.

Citation Guide