In light of the Peterson and Sausage King death penalty verdicts, the Times has an interesting article (San Quentin Debate: Death Row vs. Bay Views) on California’s death row backlog cloaked as a discussion of plans to build a new prison on valuable Bay front land to accomodate the 640 men. I have to agree with Joe Nation, the local politician quoted, that this seems like a poor use of the property but the even bigger question of why we (residents of California) spend so much money to pretend we have a death penalty is of much more interest to me.
Scott Peterson is more likely to die of old age or disease than in the executioner’s chair due to the extremely extensive process, shifting between state and federal courts, required to reach the current fairness standards. I think that the death penalty is an acceptable penalty for a few extreme, well-defined crimes and also that a post-sentencing review process is important as well. The current version is far too stretched out of shape to be reasonable and adds an immense cost, at least 30% more than life without possibility of parole, and I do not see the benefit to society in such an expense.
Want to retain executions? Fine but then get some lawyers and judges in a room and don’t come out until there’s a new system that will finish in ten years or less.
BillSaysThis 