death penalty news May 19, 2005
MASSACHUSETTS: Legislators at odds over death penalty Death by lethal injection could make a return to the commonwealth if Governor Mitt Romney has his way, but an alliance of death-penalty opponents including Acton's legislative delegation hope to keep capital punishment out of Massachusetts. Following the report of a commission charged with investigating the possibility of returning to capital punishment, Romney has proposed legislation to reintroduce the death penalty in Massachusetts, but with strict restrictions on who can be executed and under what circumstances. Under Romney's proposal, juries would be allowed to impose the death penalty only on defendants found guilty of first-degree murder in specific instances - when the murder was an act of political terrorism, when the murder was intended to obstruct an ongoing criminal proceeding, when it involved prolonged torture or was part of a "spree" of murders, or when the defendant has already been convicted of first-degree murder or is already serving a sentence of life without parole. Romney trumpeted the legislation as "the gold standard for the death penalty in the modern scientific age." While previous efforts to reinstate the death penalty in the commonwealth failed because of fears that the proper safeguards and standards of evidence were not in place, he said, "We have answered all those concerns with this bill." Lt. Governor Kerry Healey agreed, saying that Massachusetts should no longer be one of only 12 states in the nation that does not allow capital punishment. "The death penalty should be available for a narrow set of crimes that we all can agree deserve the ultimate punishment," she said. Not everyone does agree that the state should get into the killing business, however. "The governor's contention that a scientifically 'fool proof' death penalty statute is possible is obviously flawed," said Martina Jackson, the executive director of Massachusetts Citizens Against the Death Penalty. "First, the commonwealth has had a dismal history with its Medical Examiner's Office, which was revealed to be riddled with error and mismanagement. Second, DNA, the basis for 'scientific' evidence, is only available in a fraction of homicide cases and is only as accurate as those collecting samples and those testing the samples. Since the death penalty is not a deterrent, would depend on DNA in a fraction of cases, and is prohibitively expensive - costing more than $5,000,000 per case - we conclude that the governor is playing politics with human life." State senators and state representatives sympathetic to the governor's proposal have filed legislation to hold a place for his bill, but State Rep. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton, said it is unlikely that the legislature will take the question up before this fall. "With the budget discussions now and the constitutional convention scheduled for August, I don't see how it could happen before then," Eldridge said. Eldridge said that he thinks the governor's bill will have a hard time on Beacon Hill. "My impression is that this has already been very poorly received - even by death-penalty proponents who feel that it is too narrow," he said. For his part, Eldridge said he intends to vote against the bill. "I've been clear on this since I was first elected," said State Rep. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton. "I continue to believe that there is no perfect system to implement the death penalty. Because human beings are always involved in the judicial system, there's always a chance that an innocent person is going to be convicted." Eldridge said that his objection to the death penalty goes deeper than his doubts about the infallibility of the justice system. "I just don't subscribe to the notion that the state should be in the business of killing someone when the goal is to show that killing is wrong," he said. (source: The Beacon on TownOnline)
