Execute Justice: The Time Has Come to End California's Death Penalty

Who is accountable for this broken system, what are we doing to repair it, and is it really worth the price?
 
Murder victims’ family members joined legal experts in proclaiming that California’s death penalty process is broken at a hearing held by a Commission created by the state Senate to investigate problems with the system. On Jan 10, the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice - a bipartisan panel consisting of law enforcement, judges, defense attorneys, and citizens - held its first of three hearing on the state’s dysfunctional death penalty process.

Experts presented evidence of the arbitrariness and disparities that plague the overly broad system. Murder victims’ family members spoke out against the death penalty, saying that the long, drawn-out process does not help them heal and depletes critical resources from other public safety needs. Evidence of equally serious flaws, such as inadequate defense counsel and the risk that innocent people will be sentenced to death, will be presented at hearings in February and March. Together, the evidence leads to the inescapable conclusion that if we are to continue having a death penalty, it must be reformed.

But on the same day as the Commission's first hearing, Gov. Schwarzenegger held a press conference on the state's unprecedented $14 billion budget deficit, proposing across-the-board cuts to numerous public programs.  Implementing any of the reforms needed to make the death penalty fair and functional will only cost the state more money.  So in these historic times, as momentum swells in the anti-death penalty movement, the Commission, and all Californians, must consider whether a system that serves neither the public good nor victims’ families -- and is by nature prone to unfairness -- is really worth the price.

The Death Penalty is Applied Unfairly
At the first hearing, experts presented evidence about how California’s death penalty is unfairly applied, discussing troubling racial, ethnic, and geographic disparities in who is sentenced to die.  For example:

• A person whose victim is white is three times more likely to be sentenced to die than a person whose victim is African American and four times more likely than a person whose victim is Latino; 

• Counties with a high proportion of white residents are much more likely to pursue the death penalty than more diverse communities; 

• Most California counties have abandoned the death penalty. Only 10 counties account for more than 80 percent of all death sentences. 

Most death penalty states have implemented some reforms to identify death sentences that appear arbitrary and excessive, especially death sentences that may have been influenced by race.  Before New Jersey replaced the death penalty with sentencing people to die in prison, the New Jersey Supreme Court was the national leader in the struggle against racial and ethnic disparities in the death penalty. The New Jersey Supreme Court said this was because of “the unique commitment of the people of New Jersey to the elimination of racial discrimination.” 

It is a sad state of affairs that California, the most diverse state in the country, has not demonstrated the same commitment. California has done nothing at all to eliminate racial, ethnic, and geographic disparities in its death penalty. 

The Death Penalty Does Not Serve Victims' Families
Survivors of murder victims are also asking questions about the utility of the death penalty and the costs. California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, a coalition of loved ones of murder victims, has released a series of testimonials from victims’ families who oppose the death penalty, and several victims' families also offered moving live testimony at the Jan. 10 hearing. 

Lorrain Taylor choked back tears as she explained that the execution of her twin sons' murderer would do nothing to heal her pain.  Amanda and Nick Wilcox spoke about the lack of services available to victims families, an unfortunate trade-off many prosecutors make when choosing to prosecute expensive capital cases.  And Aundré Herron, herself an experienced death penalty appeals attorney and former prosecutor, spoke about her feelings after her brother’s murder. She said that while she empathizes with victims' survivors who feel a need for vengeance, she also understands that those emotions are not appropriate justification for public policy.

The death penalty already costs too much, and there is a better alternative
The Commission will hear evidence at subsequent hearings about the already high cost of California's death penalty system and about the fact that the alternative of sentencing people to die in prison not only offers more resolution and swifter punishment, but also costs significantly less money. 

Just building the new death row facility will cost $336 million, to be piled on top of the uncalculated costs of the implementing the necessary reforms. 

At the same time, Californians are being asked to tighten our belts and limit spending on health care, education, and other public programs.  The Commission needs to tell Californians the truth: We don’t have the money to fix the system. Replacing the death penalty with sentencing people to die in prison will allow us to invest in effective public safety programs that will actually help make us safer.

Sentencing people to die in prison is the only option that can guarantee murderers do not go free -- and that the innocent do not pay with their lives.

California has paid dearly for the death penalty and has gotten nothing but a broken, unfair, and unjust system in return. It is time to get rid of the death penalty and spend that money on catching more killers, preventing more murders, and providing services to victims’ families that can actually help.