A recent edi­to­r­i­al in The Washington Post high­light­ed ongo­ing prob­lems with Marylands death penal­ty despite leg­is­la­tion passed in 2009 meant to reform the sys­tem. According to the edi­to­r­i­al, the legislature’s reform fixed noth­ing; if any­thing, it cod­i­fied a sys­tem even more arbi­trary than the one it replaced. Now the nature of the evi­dence, rather than the bar­bar­i­ty of the crime, is the crit­i­cal fac­tor. So a mur­der con­vic­tion based on DNA evi­dence might result in a death sen­tence, but not a Virginia Tech-style killing spree whose per­pe­tra­tor is iden­ti­fied by mul­ti­ple wit­ness­es.” The edi­to­r­i­al also explained that the reforms did not address racial and juris­dic­tion­al dis­par­i­ties in the death penalty’s appli­ca­tion, and con­tin­ues to impose bur­den on mur­der vic­tims’ sur­vivors: The bro­ken sys­tem is par­tic­u­lar­ly bur­den­some for the fam­i­lies of mur­der vic­tims, who face years, even decades, of lit­i­ga­tion. Three of the state’s five death-row pris­on­ers were sen­tenced near­ly 30 years ago; the oth­ers were sen­tenced in the mid-1990s.” The edi­to­r­i­al called for the Maryland General Assembly to con­sid­er end­ing the death penal­ty, say­ing that by duck­ing the issue, they are leav­ing in place a cost­ly, inef­fi­cient, unjust and dys­func­tion­al sys­tem that exacts a ter­ri­ble toll on the fam­i­lies of mur­der vic­tims.” Read full edi­to­r­i­al below.

Maryland’s bro­ken death penal­ty
By Editorial Board, Published: March 6

ON PAPER, Maryland courts are empow­ered to impose the death penal­ty in cer­tain mur­der cas­es. In prac­tice, the state’s death penal­ty is in remis­sion. Five con­victs remain on death row, and defen­dants can be pros­e­cut­ed for cap­i­tal mur­der and sen­tenced to death, but the state lacks any legal method of car­ry­ing out exe­cu­tions. No one has been put to death in Maryland since 2005.

That sta­tus quo seems accept­able to the pow­er bro­kers in Annapolis, who would rather not add to a list of con­tro­ver­sies that now includes legal­iz­ing same-sex mar­riage and sub­si­diz­ing high­er edu­ca­tion for illegal immigrants.

But by duck­ing the issue, they are leav­ing in place a cost­ly, inef­fi­cient, unjust and dys­func­tion­al sys­tem that exacts a ter­ri­ble toll on the fam­i­lies of mur­der vic­tims. Rather than leg­is­lat­ing and lead­ing, state law­mak­ers are in denial.

Three years ago, an effort to abol­ish the death penal­ty nar­row­ly failed in the General Assembly, which instead restrict­ed it to cas­es where there is DNA evi­dence, a video­taped con­fes­sion or video link­ing the sus­pect to a mur­der. But the legislature’s reform fixed noth­ing; if any­thing, it cod­i­fied a sys­tem even more arbi­trary than the one it replaced. Now the nature of the evi­dence, rather than the bar­bar­i­ty of the crime, is the crit­i­cal fac­tor. So a mur­der con­vic­tion based on DNA evi­dence might result in a death sen­tence, but not a Virginia Tech-style killing spree whose per­pe­tra­tor is iden­ti­fied by multiple witnesses.

Nor did the changes in the Maryland law address the racial and juris­dic­tion­al dis­par­i­ties in the death penalty’s appli­ca­tion. And there is no evi­dence that the death penal­ty is more effec­tive at deter­ring mur­ders than is a sen­tence of life without parole.

The bro­ken sys­tem is par­tic­u­lar­ly bur­den­some for the fam­i­lies of mur­der vic­tims, who face years, even decades, of lit­i­ga­tion. Three of the state’s five death-row pris­on­ers were sen­tenced near­ly 30 years ago; the oth­ers were sen­tenced in the mid-1990s.

Whatever moral con­vic­tions one holds about cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment — and we think it is wrong — Maryland has failed to find an even­hand­ed, just and fair-mind­ed way to apply it. As a recent report by some of Maryland’s most promi­nent attor­neys con­clud­ed, the state’s cur­rent law is like­ly to increase the arbi­trari­ness of the impo­si­tion of the death penal­ty because per­sons who com­mit the most heinous crimes — the worst of the worst’ — are not nec­es­sar­i­ly the same peo­ple who will be eli­gi­ble for the death penalty.”

A major­i­ty of the Maryland General Assembly favors an end to cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment in the state. Still, leg­isla­tive lead­ers are reluc­tant to allow con­sid­er­a­tion of a bill that would repeal the death penal­ty and shift the antic­i­pat­ed sav­ings in the state bud­get to pro­grams to ben­e­fit vic­tims’ fam­i­lies. The lead­ers would rather leave in place a sys­tem that is a dis­grace to jus­tice, and to Maryland.

(“Maryland’s bro­ken death penal­ty,” The Washington Post, March 6, 2012). Read more Editorials about the death penalty.

Citation Guide