THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, July 16, 1994 TAG: 9407150015
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 40 lines
I read with interest the excellent investigative report by staff writers June Arney and Joe Jackson (June 26-27) of nine men wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to die in Virginia's ``death machine.'' It is one of the reasons the ``death penalty experiment'' has failed. It is a given that human beings not only make mistakes but are also capable of fabricating stories. Since we are human beings, we have no right to decide who is to live and who is to die.
If we are going to have a death penalty, then any prisoner must be able to introduce new evidence at any time that will prove his innocence. The Virginia General Assembly had a chance to make that possible but buckled under pressure from the attorney general's office. Even death-penalty proponents believe that new evidence must be considered by the courts at any time.
What is the answer then? How about an alternative to the death penalty? When given the alternative of life in prison with the possibility of parole after 25 years combined with restitution to the victims' family, only 27 percent favor the death penalty. That is a clear minority. Then why do we still execute? Does our taste for vengeance run so fervent that we risk the possibility of executing innocent human beings? Are we more interested in punishment and making a point than in prevention and rehabilitation? Or do politicians feel that they will be considered ``soft on crime'' if they vote to allow new evidence to be introduced at any time, let alone vote to abolish the death penalty?
And my final question: Why do we kill people who kill people to prove that killing people is wrong?
HENRY HELLER, chairperson
Virginians for Alternatives to State Killing
Charlottesville, July 1, 1994 by CNB