That the title of today's Dallas Morning News editorial, subtitled, "It's time to end capital punishment."
Ernest Ray Willis set a fire that killed two women in Pecos County. So said Texas prosecutors who obtained a conviction in 1987 and sent Mr. Willis to death row. But it wasn't true.
Seventeen years later, a federal judge overturned the conviction, finding that prosecutors had drugged Mr. Willis with powerful anti-psychotic medication during his trial and then used his glazed appearance to characterize him as "cold-hearted." They also suppressed evidence and introduced neither physical proof nor eyewitnesses in the trial – and his court-appointed lawyers mounted a lousy defense. Besides, another death-row inmate confessed to the killings.
The state dropped all charges. Ernest Ray Willis emerged from prison a pauper. But he was lucky: He had his life. Not so Carlos De Luna, who was executed in 1989 for the stabbing death of a single mother who worked at a gas station. For years, another man with a history of violent crimes bragged that he had committed the crime. The case against Mr. De Luna, in many eyes, does not stand up to closer examination.
There are signs he was innocent. We don't know for sure, but we do know that if the state made a mistake, nothing can rectify it.
And that uncomfortable truth has led this editorial board to re-examine its century-old stance on the death penalty. This board has lost confidence that the state of Texas can guarantee that every inmate it executes is truly guilty of murder. We do not believe that any legal system devised by inherently flawed human beings can determine with moral certainty the guilt of every defendant convicted of murder.
That is why we believe the state of Texas should abandon the death penalty – because we cannot reconcile the fact that it is both imperfect and irreversible.
And:
The state holds in its hands the power of life and death. It is an awesome power, one that citizens of a democracy must approach in fear and trembling, and in full knowledge that the state's justice system, like everything humanity touches, is fated to fall short of perfection. If we are doomed to err in matters of life and death, it is far better to err on the side of mercy and caution. It is far better to err on the side of life. The state cannot impose death – an irrevocable sentence – with absolute certainty in all cases. Therefore the state should not impose it at all. • A New Standard: Now that Texas juries have a choice, and life without parole is the superior option. Coming tomorrow.
The Morning News also has the editorial column, "A death penalty slowdown, but not in Texas."
The nation is slowly moving down a faintly familiar path – the one that leads away from widespread use of the death penalty.
Unfortunately, Texas appears headed in the wrong direction.
Fifty years ago, America lost its appetite for executions. We were a nation that had endured two world wars and the Great Depression in less than 30 years. Newfound peace and prosperity nurtured enlightened thinking about civil rights and justice. The Supreme Court introduced the concept of an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society."
The public was developing a growing distaste for government-sanctioned killing, and courts increasingly challenged the procedures and rationale in imposing the ultimate penalty. States began sending fewer people to their death chambers. Even in Texas.
But it wasn't judicial fiat that spawned the growing distaste for government-sanctioned killing. Judges, juries, prosecutors and lawmakers began abandoning the death penalty in the middle of the 20th century. Even in Texas.
Comments