A recent arti­cle by Terrence P. Dwyer (pic­tured), retired New York State Police Investigator, and George F. Kain, a police com­mis­sion­er in Ridgefield, Connecticut, dis­missed the notion that the death penal­ty is need­ed to pro­tect law enforce­ment offi­cers. Dwyer and Kain wrote that a major­i­ty of police chiefs believe that the death penal­ty does not deter vio­lent crime and rank the death penal­ty last in a list of effec­tive tools for fight­ing crime. In states like New York, which abol­ished its death penal­ty in 2004, or North Carolina, where there has been a de fac­to mora­to­ri­um since 2006, the num­bers indi­cate no sta­tis­ti­cal increase in police offi­cer homi­cides after the death penal­ty was repealed or ren­dered moot through mora­to­ri­um,” the authors wrote. They also encour­aged law­mak­ers to weigh the sub­stan­tial costs of the death penal­ty in their deci­sion-mak­ing. They stat­ed, The Connecticut death penal­ty costs $4 mil­lion annu­al­ly, accord­ing to a 2009 esti­mate by the General Assembly’s non-par­ti­san Office of Fiscal Analysis. While cap­i­tal cas­es in Connecticut account for just .06 % of cas­es in the Public Defender’s office, the cost to defend these cas­es was near­ly $3.5 mil­lion, over 7 % of the office’s entire budget.”

The arti­cle cit­ed polls of police chiefs con­duct­ed by the Death Penalty Information Center.

(G. Kain and T. Dwyer, Why law enforce­ment sup­ports abol­ish­ing the death penal­ty,” Danbury News Times, April 23, 2011). Read more New Voices. See Costs and Deterrence.

Citation Guide