Would the 157 inmates on North Carolina's death row, convicted of the most heinous of crimes, prompt tears and rivers of sympathy on the part of most North Carolinians? To be sure, no. But it appears that the seeking of the death penalty is something about which prosecutors are no longer quite so certain.
Nor, according to an Elon University poll, is the public, which once overwhelmingly agreed with the notion of the death penalty but is not as supportive as it used to be. These are positive developments, given the flaws in the case for the ultimate penalty.
A news report by The News & Observer's Anne Blythe laid out the reasons for the changes of mindset, many of them around for years and long touted by death penalty opponents.
One, the imposition of the death penalty, the one punishment that the state cannot "correct," is by no means a perfect process. Thanks to DNA evidence and on occasion the appearance of brand new physical evidence, wrongful convictions have been exposed in many states, including North Carolina.
Two, capital trials are increasingly expensive and the death penalty is far from a certain outcome. The Center for Death Penalty Litigation shows that 14 years ago, there were 60 capital trials in North Carolina and more than half of them ended with death sentences. Last year, nine capital trials resulted in two death sentences.
Three, allegations of racial discrimination continue to plague death penalty trials, focusing on jury selections and the factors that go into prosecutors' decisions to seek death penalties.
Fourth, the resources to put up a competent defense are decidedly uneven, as are the skills of defense attorneys.
Then there are the sideshows: doctors' associations have objected to physicians, sworn to save lives, being compelled to assist in executions in any way, and there's been an ongoing debate as to the use of lethal injection, specifically as to whether it may constitute cruel and unusual punishment, something prohibited by the United States Constitution.
The possibility of an error, of executing an innocent person, is of course first among the reasons why the death penalty is an unwise alternative in the criminal justice system. Would death penalty advocates really suggest that making such a mistake once in a while is a risk the state, acting by the way on behalf of all citizens, should be willing to take?
The task of the justice system is not to get revenge, though it should be said that the feelings of the families of innocent victims of awful crimes must be understood. The system's mission, though, is to act on behalf of all the people in a search for truth, and to uphold the law. The presence or absence of a death penalty doesn't change that mission. But having that penalty as an option certainly complicates it. And given that ever-present possibility of error, it is just not worth it.
