In a recent Dallas Morning News edi­to­r­i­al, the paper not­ed the incon­gruity between the state apol­o­giz­ing to a prison inmate who was freed fol­low­ing DNA test­ing, and its aggres­sive pur­suit of irrev­o­ca­ble exe­cu­tions. The paper stat­ed that ​“human error is an inher­ent part” of the jus­tice sys­tem and called on leg­is­la­tors to enact a mora­to­ri­um on exe­cu­tions until the state can review the accu­ra­cy and fair­ness of its cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment process, because ​“For the con­demned, evi­dence of an error could come too late.” The paper wrote:
The prison door has swung open repeat­ed­ly in recent years to allow wrong­ful­ly
con­vict­ed pris­on­ers to walk free. In many cas­es, DNA evi­dence has offered them
a sec­ond chance at life on the outside.

The head­lines trum­pet­ing their inno­cence pro­vide us with bold-let­ter reminders
that our jus­tice sys­tem does­n’t always get it right:

Last week, Andrew Gossett became the 11th Dallas County man grant­ed his
free­dom after DNA con­firmed what he had been say­ing for sev­en years: He did­n’t
do it. Mr. Gossett had been sen­tenced to 50 years in prison for a sex­u­al
assault he did not com­mit.

That juries and judges are fal­li­ble is not a rev­e­la­tion. Human error is an
inher­ent part of the sys­tem. Thank good­ness that in the case of Mr. Gossett a
ter­ri­ble wrong has been cor­rect­ed.

At the same time that this 46-year-old Garland man begins to rebuild his life,
news­pa­per head­lines note that January will be a par­tic­u­lar­ly dead­ly month for
Texas pris­on­ers. The state is poised to exe­cute five death row inmates dur­ing
a 20-day stretch.

Against a back­drop of over­turned con­vic­tions and DNA advances, these planned
exe­cu­tions also should give us pause. For the con­demned, evi­dence of an error
could come too late. Lethal injec­tions don’t allow those sec­ond chances.

And while improved tech­nol­o­gy and new evi­dence have cleared only a tiny
frac­tion of pris­on­ers, those cas­es serve notice that even the remote
pos­si­bil­i­ty of a mis­take is unac­cept­able in death penal­ty cas­es.

At least 10 oth­er states are review­ing their cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment laws. Two have
declared a mora­to­ri­um.

But Texas has pressed on, account­ing for near­ly half of the exe­cu­tions in the
coun­try last year.

Lawmakers have dis­missed our calls for a death penal­ty mora­to­ri­um. But the
frail­ties in the jus­tice sys­tem that have been exposed sug­gest that it’s time
to revis­it this issue.

When Mr. Gossett was set free last week, new­ly elect­ed District Attorney Craig
Watkins was in the court­room. He thought it was impor­tant to tell Mr. Gossett,
​“We’re sor­ry.”

State offi­cials won’t have that oppor­tu­ni­ty if cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment is met­ed out
incorrectly.(Dallas Morning News, January 10, 2007). See Editorials and Innocence.

Tags
Citation Guide