Make death penalty quicker, cheaper and more effective

Amnesty International's Frank Jannuzi wrote one of those letters that causes me to ask, "Where do I begin to answer?" ("Time to repeal Maryland's death penalty," Jan. 8).

In the second paragraph, he alludes to the fact that imposition of the death penalty is "extremely expensive," and it is; but the question is, why should that be? No matter which method is used to end the life of a heinous criminal, the "means" to accomplish that are actually inexpensive. How much do those chemicals cost, or that burst of electricity?

The imposition of the death penalty is extremely expensive because it allows for endless appeals at the expense of taxpayers, including the families of the victims! Many of these cases go on for so long that the heinousness of the crime is forgotten or the witnesses actually die! Legislators should be working, not to abolish the death penalty, but to find ways to make it more cost-effective! How about this? One trial, one appeal, then either acquittal, or execution. Now that would quite effectively and greatly reduce the costs. How expensive is it for the public to incarcerate for life a convicted murderer?

In the same paragraph, he resorts to the old mantra of death penalty opponents, that "it does not deter crime." That argument is specious and impossible to prove. How many times a day do "ordinary" law-abiding citizens become so angered, so enraged with someone, that they might murder them, only to relent because they understand the possible ramifications (loss of their own lives) of such acts? No one can say how many times this happens, but similarly, no one can seriously claim that it doesn't happen either. So, at least a part of the time, the reality of a looming death penalty deters murderous conduct!

The effectiveness of the death penalty is greatly compromised when it isn't used. There needs to be a "certainty" attached to it to make it effective, and that hasn't happened. One unarguable, incontestable and unmitigated fact about the death penalty is that it is a certain and complete cure for recidivism; deny that if you will, Mr. Jannuzi!

I am all for any effort to completely eliminate any doubt concerning the death penalty! DNA tests, certainly! Certification of "eye witness" accounts, once again, certainly! Whatever is required; but once it has been determined, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the assailant is guilty, "We the People" owe them their right to a speedy trial (and disposition) unencumbered by dragging the process out endlessly with appeal after appeal at taxpayer's expense.

One last note: Due to Mr. Jannuzi's position as deputy executive director of Amnesty International, I believe his commentary to be colored more by his ideology than common sense!

Robert Di Stefano, Abingdon

The writer is a retired major with the Baltimore City Police Department.

  • Text NEWS to 70701 to get Baltimore Sun local news text alerts
  • Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
    Related Content
    • Lethal injections don't have to be botched [Letter]
      Lethal injections don't have to be botched [Letter]

      Having just read your latest editorial about an inmate's execution ("Another botched injection, July 27), two things stand out. The first is obvious — when something like this happens, it...

    • Another botched execution [Editorial]
      Another botched execution [Editorial]

      Our view: In light of the spate of gruesome deaths from experimental drug protocols, the Supreme Court needs to revisit its blessing of lethal injection

    • A case for the death penalty [Letter]
      A case for the death penalty [Letter]

      There is a reason even some libertarians support the death penalty, albeit in highly restricted cases. That's because of situations just like this — a brutal and thoroughly unjustifiable murder (some murders are justifiable), a family torn apart and a more-likely-than-not...

    • Why all the sympathy for condemned killers? [Letter]
      Why all the sympathy for condemned killers? [Letter]

      Why is it the convicted criminals get all the sympathy from some segments of the public? ("Death penalty limbo," April 29.) The "hysteria" over a humane way to execute a heinous, cold blooded killer is almost hysterical. The way that was developed to humanely execute a criminal has been torn...

    • Don't shed tears for a killer's 'botched' execution [Letter]

      Once again the bleeding hearts of this country are crying over the so-called botched execution of a man who tortured, raped, shot then buried alive a 19-year-old recent high school graduate ("Fresh execution questions," May 1). Why aren't those tears being shed over Stephanie Neiman? She was...

    • There's no such thing as a 'humane' execution [Letter]
      There's no such thing as a 'humane' execution [Letter]

      There is a surreal feeling that comes from reading the media commentary of the botched execution of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma ("Fresh execution questions," May 1). It is sort of like listening to a discussion about rape in which it is assumed that rape is OK as long as one does it politely....

    • Death penalty limbo [Editorial]
      Death penalty limbo [Editorial]

      Our view: With prospects for O'Malley to commute capital sentences uncertain, those running to replace him should address the issue of Md.'s death row

    • Killer of four deserves death penalty [Letter]

      As described in the recent article, "Escapee from Michigan prison caught in Indiana" (Feb. 4), the fugitive in question was serving four life sentences for killing four people in 1993. The murderer escaped from prison, then kidnapped a woman who fortunately was able to escape without being...