EDITORIALS: A Call for Examination of Death Penalty in Tennessee

After a number of years in which Tennessee has seen legal twists and turns, costly confusion and probable miscarriages of justice in capital murder cases, there is a sliver of hope for improvement.

It is tragic that it took lives being lost in the process, but for the sake of people on Tennessee’s death row; members of the legal system; elected officials; and the public at large, we look to the legislative study committee on the death penalty for a more just system in the future.

The committee began its work this year, after the 2006 execution of Sedley Alley was questioned because of DNA evidence that could have implicated a different person in the slaying of a 19-year-old woman; after lethal injection, one of two execution methods used by the state of Tennessee, was suspended by the governor over questions about its effectiveness, then reinstated, then suspended again pending a U.S. Supreme Court decision about similar concerns in Kentucky.

While other states resumed use of lethal injection after the court decision, Tennessee cases remain on hold because of an additional legal challenge brought last year by a death-row inmate.

Also, the state reluctantly had to release another inmate, Paul House, earlier this year after 22 years on death row for a crime experts say he did not commit. While the state has dropped attempts to have the ailing House executed, they plan to retry him in March.

Since the state insists on applying the death penalty, it at least needs to do a far better job of ensuring the right people are brought to justice. The Associated Press reported that the legislative committee heard last month from Barry Scheck, a prominent defense attorney and co-founder of The Innocence Project, a legal center that specializes in overturning wrongful convictions. Scheck represented Alley but was unable to persuade state courts to release DNA evidence for testing. Alley’s previous lawyers focused on a mental-illness defense and never tried to use the DNA evidence that would have proved his innocence.

Scheck told the committee that it could institute reforms, such as educating Tennessee courts on ordering DNA testing, and standardizing police procedures, such as preserving crime-scene evidence and taping confessions and eyewitness statements.

Forensics and police procedures are two pieces of the puzzle; another is ensuring that murder suspects get adequate representation. The legislative committee also met last month with Tennessee Supreme Court Chief Justice Janice Holder and Justice Gary Wade to discuss forming a commission to train attorneys in capital cases and provide funds for defense attorneys who represent indigent clients.

The Tennessee Justice Project, along with a number of studies by groups nationwide, has found many death-row inmates receive inadequate counsel because they are indigent or members of racial and ethnic minorities. Prosecutors typically have nearly three times the resources of public defenders and indigent-defense attorneys.

According to the AP, Justice Holder said the Tennessee Supreme Court doesn’t have an opinion on creating a commission, but is reluctant to approve the idea without additional funding and without more information on whether such commissions have worked elsewhere.

But this is clearly an area where Tennessee must seek effective reform of its system. Not only are there cases of innocent people being sentenced to death because of faulty representation, a lack of legal understanding of the capital system leads to further delays in disposition of cases, keeping inmates in limbo on death row for decades and prolonging the pain for the families of murder victims.

Whether in support of or in opposition to a death penalty, the residents of Tennessee should have clarity, compassion and, especially, justice for everyone. The finality of execution demands that we put an end to mistakes in the system.