On June 24, the Democrat Herald (Oregon) fea­tured an edi­to­r­i­al about Randy Lee Guzek, who was recent­ly sen­tenced to death for the fourth time for mur­ders com­mit­ted in 1987. The Oregon Supreme Court over­turned his three pre­vi­ous death sen­tences on var­i­ous grounds. The edi­to­r­i­al ques­tioned whether such a death penal­ty process made any sense. ​“If the pro­ce­dures are so dif­fi­cult that Oregon tri­al courts can­not get them right in three tries, maybe there is some­thing wrong with the pro­ce­dures and the sys­tem.” In 26 years, Oregon has exe­cut­ed two defen­dants, both of whom waived their appeals. The paper con­clud­ed, ​“The appel­late courts are telling the peo­ple some­thing: Forget the death penal­ty; it’s not gonna hap­pen. And if it ever does hap­pen, it will be many, many years after the crime. By that time, it will be easy to argue that the man fac­ing exe­cu­tion is not the same bad char­ac­ter who, decades before, took some­one’s life. So why kill him now?” The edi­to­r­i­al posed life with­out parole as an alter­na­tive to death penal­ty in Oregon, say­ing ” Unless we want to keep mak­ing a mock­ery of the death penal­ty law by refus­ing to car­ry it out, Oregon would be bet­ter off if pros­e­cu­tors just asked for life with­out parole instead.” Read full edi­to­r­i­al below.

Editorial: What courts are telling us

If you’re look­ing for an indict­ment of one part of our judi­cial sys­tem con­sid­er this open­ing sen­tence of a lit­tle news sto­ry from Bend we ran the last week: ​“An Oregon man con­vict­ed of mur­der­ing a cou­ple in their home has been sen­tenced to death for the fourth time in 22 years.”

The sto­ry was about Randy Lee Guzek, who killed Rod and Lois Houser in 1987. The killer was 18 at the time. Now he’s 41. Three times, the Oregon Supreme Court had over­turned his pre­vi­ous death sen­tences on procedural grounds.

The aver­age cit­i­zen has to ask: If the pro­ce­dures are so dif­fi­cult that Oregon tri­al courts can­not get them right in three tries, maybe there is some­thing wrong with the pro­ce­dures and the system.

Voters rein­stat­ed the death penal­ty, most recent­ly, in 1984. Since then two men have been put to death by lethal injec­tion, both because they had refused to go through the rou­tine appeals. Dozens of oth­er death sen­tences have been put off while the pro­ce­dures are followed.

The appel­late courts are telling the peo­ple some­thing: Forget the death penal­ty; it’s not gonna hap­pen. And if it ever does hap­pen, it will be many, many years after the crime. By that time, it will be easy to argue that the man fac­ing exe­cu­tion is not the same bad char­ac­ter who, decades before, took some­one’s life. So why kill him now?

For aggra­vat­ed mur­der, Oregon law offers anoth­er sen­tence: Life without parole.

Unless we want to keep mak­ing a mock­ery of the death penal­ty law by refus­ing to car­ry it out, Oregon would be bet­ter off if pros­e­cu­tors just asked for life with­out parole instead.

(Editorial, ​“What courts are telling us,” The Democrat Herald, June 24, 2010). See Life Without Parole and Editorials.

Citation Guide