Maryland Death Penalty Debate

Gov. Martin O'Malley testified Wednesday in support of a bill to repeal the death penalty in Maryland, where a court order has stopped executions until new regulations are in place.

Post staff writer John Wagner was online Thursday, Feb. 22 at 1 p.m. to take your questions and comments about the death penalty debate.

A transcript follows

____________________

John Wagner: Thanks for joining this online discussion about legislation pending in Maryland's General Assembly to repeal the death penalty. A pair of committees heard several hours of testimony on the legislation yesterday, including that of Gov. Martin O'Malley, who has urged lawmakers to replace capital punishment with life without parole. I'm happy to take your questions.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: So, what do you think the chances are the death penalty actually gets repealed?

John Wagner: I might as well tackle this one first.

Supporters of the repeal believe they have the best chance in years, in part because of Gov. O'Malley's support and in part because of a changing national climate on the issue.

Even some supporters of the bill acknowledge, however, that the Senate in particular is still a tough sell. Six votes will be needed to get the bill out of the Judicial Proceedings Committee. Supporters are hoping to sway a conservative Republican who is a devout Catholic to join five other senators who have already indicated they will support the repeal.

If the bill gets out of committee, it faces a possible filibuster on the Senate floor. That would require a super-majority of votes to break. The chamber is pretty evenly divided on the issue, which could make it difficult for supporters to meet that threshold.

_______________________

Houston: While it is true that we have no conclusive evidence that we have executed an innocent man, it is also true that there are reams of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence that we have. Isn't it only a matter of time until we prove that an innocent man (or woman) was executed? It's bound to happen. Then what do we say? "Sorry, my bad?" A system designed by humans and run by humans is inherently flawed. For every punishment save death, we can attempt to make things better for the wrongly accused. The finality of death is precisely the argument to be used against it.

John Wagner: That could be the issue on which this debate turns. Your argument echoes that of Gov. O'Malley, who yesterday suggested that the death penalty "inherently necessitates the occasional taking of a wrongly convicted, innocent life." Others, including Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger, argued that the appropriate checks and balances are in place.

_______________________

Baltimore: It is interesting how the myriad cases of totally innocent men being brought off death row due to DNA testing has shifted the debate. Now pro death penalty people are saying things such as"We have to keep it so prosecutors have a bargaining chip," or, "We have to keep it so we can execute the most heinous killers about whom their is no doubt."

The problem, from my perspective, is that if you keep the penalty on the books, you will inevitably put more innocent men like Kurt Bloodsworth (Lord, what a symbolic name) on death row. And just as inevitably, some of them will be put to death.

John Wagner: Bloodsworth certainly provided some of the most emotional testimony yesterday, telling senators that "if it can happen to an honorably discharged Marine Corps veteran, it can happen to anybody." Bloodsworth was on death row for rape and murder charges that were later dismissed because of DNA evidence.

_______________________

Alabama: Just a comment. I know some states have abolished, reinstituted and abolished the death penalty several times. A death penalty historian once told me that it's awfully hard to sustain a widespread popular movement for or against capital punishment, mainly because the issue doesn't touch most people's daily lives. Executions take place out of the public eye, and the vast majority of people will never know the victim of a murder or someone convicted of a capital crime. There are activists on the issue (and I'm personally opposed to the death penalty) but it's hard to get people interested in something they rarely, if ever, have a personal stake in.

John Wagner: A state's policy can also be altered depending on its leadership. In Maryland, former Gov. Parris Glendening, a Democrat, imposed a moratorium because of concerns about racial disparities in the death penalty's application. That was lifted when Gov. Robert Ehrlich, a Republican, took office in 2003.

Interestingly, O'Malley could have an impact on the state's policy even if the repeal legislation fails. A December court ruling will require the administration to issue new regulations on lethal injection for executions to resume. There is a fair amount of speculation that O'Malley may choose not to issue those regulations.

_______________________

Baltimore: My opinion of Governor O'Malley has changed dramatically since I heard he wants to repeal the death penalty. This coming after a vicious campaign for the office during which he was labeled soft on crime. What benefit does he feel repealing this punishment will do for the citizens of Maryland? How does this ease the minds of people fearful of Maryland turning into what Baltimore has become, one of the deadliest areas in the country?

John Wagner: The death penalty did not become much of an issue in the governor's race. O'Malley would offer his position when asked, but neither his Democratic primary opponent nor Gov. Ehrlich pressed him on it.

O'Malley argued yesterday that the murder rate has actually declined more in states without the death penalty than in those that impose it.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: I don't mean to be stupid, but does Maryland really execute anybody? I know it happens in Virginia, but it I don't read much about it in Maryland.

It's my understanding, from the news, that the death penalty is really expensive. If as I suspect they don't actually execute anybody anyway, then why not get rid of it and save some money?

John Wagner: Maryland executes far fewer prisoners than Virginia. Since 1978, when executions resumed in Maryland, five people have been put to death. The figure in Virginia is 98.

That is one argument being used by opponents of the repeal -- that Maryland is very selective about which prisoners deserve the ultimate punishment.

_______________________

Vienna, Va.: I conflicted about the death penalty. On the one hand, I think it's over-prescribed, prescribed unfairly, and has little deterrent effect.

Having said that, there is one point in the pro-death penalty argument that I have a hard time getting around. No matter how hard a murderer's life sentence in prison will be, no matter how complete and sincere his rehabilitation, the point is that the murderer gets to improve his life -- gets to live, period -- while his victim is gone forever, lost to themselves and their loved ones. That may be okay for non-premeditated murderers, but what about hit men, or serial killers?

And I also have a sneaking suspicion that, once the death penalty is abolished, certain activists will start pressing for the abolition of life without parole. Their argument will be that it is inhumane to keep prisoners locked away for life, that it denies a rehabilitated convict the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of that rehabilitation.

John Wagner: Thanks for your thoughts. Regarding your last point: At least for now, advocates of the repeal, including O'Malley, are not voicing concerns about life without parole.

_______________________

D.C.: Just like rabid dogs, some people just need to be put to sleep. There is no evidence an innocent man has been to put to death. I am not saying we should use the deal penalty indiscriminately but the world's worst killers deserve the world's worst punishment.

John Wagner: Your argument, though not your exact terminology, is being pushed by lawmakers opposed to the repeal. In fact, some legislators are pushing an alternate bill that would allow executions to resume in Maryland even if the O'Malley administration does not issue new regulations on lethal injection.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I'm not at all a religious person, but since the majority of death penalty advocates are, and one of the commandments is "Thou Shalt not Kill," doesn't that damage their credibility to even enter the argument?

John Wagner: Among the organizations that favor the death penalty repeal is the Catholic Church. But there are Catholic lawmakers in Maryland on the other side of the argument, as well as some who feel deeply conflicted. One of those, Sen. Alex Mooney, could be key to whether the legislation moves out of committee in the Senate this year.

_______________________

D.C.: Just a comment from a single-mom, at work today.

Right and wrong or morality; whether we chose the death penalty or not should not hinge on which political party is in office. In other words, you say there was a moratorium on the death penalty when a Democrat was governor, but it was repelled when a Republican came into office. The fact that these issues do hinge on what party is in office, is a poor statement about how we as a society value life.

Lastly, even though my brother is an educated African-American male who works for defense intelligence, how much more likely do statistics show that he would get convicted and go to death row, then his 41-year-old white male counterpart.

With all of our shortcomings and prejudices as human beings, should we really be making the decision of whether another one lives or dies?

John Wagner: While it is true that more Democrats than Republicans favor a repeal, the issue does not break cleanly among party lines. There are plenty of Democrats in the General Assembly, including Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr., who are death penalty supporters. He is among those sponsoring legislation to allow executions to resume in Maryland in the wake of the December court ruling.

_______________________

Re: People's Fear?: I'd like to ask Baltimore a question...do you feel safer with a death penalty option? If so, why? It's well known that the death penalty doesn't prevent murders. The only function the death penalty serves is as a form of catharsis for the victim's friends and family, and, to a lesser extent, society as a whole.

I still want to know why the two men who killed Stephanie Ann Roper weren't given the chair, but that's probably far far before your time. I'm against it, but putting those two down would have give me a small measure of satisfaction...er, catharsis.

John Wagner: I'll let the two of you hash this one out...

_______________________

A valid point : Is that those men who were freed from death row with DNA were convicted before DNA technology. NOW they would never be convicted, so that threat of the wrong person being convicted is gone, what with the DNA evidence being conclusive. It works both ways.

John Wagner: That was another point brought out yesterday. O'Malley and other supporters of the repeal still argue that the possibility of executing an innocent person is enough not to impose the penalty at all.

_______________________

Standing with the Gov., Maryland:

Every Democratic legislator in Maryland is faced with a clear choice: They can stand behind their newly elected leader, who is bravely risking his political capital on an issue that does not touch the lives of the average voter, or they can crawl back into some kind of primitive "Eye for an Eye" mindset, and hope that the issue goes away. This issue will come to a vote in the Senate and the House, and the Governor will know exactly how everyone voted. In case anyone forgot, our next elections will be in 2008, and the governor will be a good friend to have during both the primaries and the general election.

John Wagner: It is unclear what form O'Malley's lobbying will take on this issue. Traditionally, legislative leaders have not tried too hard to persuade members on issues such as the death penalty and abortion, leaving them to the consciences of members. So O'Malley has a delicate task ahead.

_______________________

Re disparities: Earlier you mentioned the main reason why Glendening placed a moratorium on executions. I would like to take this moment to point out that the data upon which Glendening based his decision came directly from the Justice Department. Furthermore, it is the reason that a number of governors ended the death penalty. The underlying disparity is in the way that people with identical records are sentenced differently for no apparent reason other than race or wealth. It is fitting that we talk about this issue at this time, because it is a relic of our past that is institutionalized in our legal system. Until we can guarantee that we have given every individual the same treatment as someone else, we, in my opinion, should not use the ultimate, and quite final punitive option.

John Wagner: It's worth noting that O'Malley did not employ the same argument in his testimony yesterday. For the most part, he offered pragmatic arguments about the cost and effectiveness of capital punishment.

He suggested, for example, that Maryland has spent $22.4 million that it would not have spent had the death penalty not been in place. That money, O'Malley argued, would be better spent on police and drug treatment.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: For those who support the death penalty out of concern for the victims' families, please consider that these people will likely live much of their lives in pain. That's regardless of whether the murderer is put to death or living in prison.

This happens all the time -- think about when someone is killed by a drunk driver. That drunk driver/murderer will be out of prison at some point. No one would say that murderer should be put to death because it would make the family feel better.

The victim's healing (or not) is something different from the issue of whether we as a society use state-sanctioned murder.

John Wagner: Thanks for your thoughts.

_______________________

It's well known that the death penalty doesn't prevent murders.: Read Ann Rule's book about Ted Bundy. She interviews him in jail and he said he went to Florida to kill deliberately because he knew they didn't have the death penalty. He killed two college girls in Florida. (he later went to another state and was executed after killing there)

John Wagner: Somewhat to your point, O'Malley said yesterday that since 2005, the murder rate was 46 percent higher in states that had the death penalty than in states without it.

_______________________

Anonymous: The single mom from DC says: "With all of our shortcomings and prejudices as human beings, should we really be making the decision of whether another one lives or dies?"

I just want to say that I so agree with her statement/question. I feel this same way about how the death penalty is even decided/applied. Who is qualified to define and decide what makes a crime heinous. Who establishes "the line"....

People comparing human criminals to rabid dogs surely aren't able to distinguish what kind of crime crosses the line and deserves death.

John Wagner: Thanks for your thoughts.

_______________________

Baltimore: The "don't worry, innocent people can't be put to death because we have DNA technology" as as an excuse for keeping the death penalty doesn't wash. There are some crimes where there is no DNA evidence (for example, a street shooting). Eyewitnesses are often wrong in identification -- and guilty parties are often brought to trial because they brag about the killing to a cell mate, or girlfriend, or whatever.

John Wagner: There are obviously strong feelings on both sides of this issue. Thanks for your thoughts.

_______________________

Standing with the Gov., Maryland:

Not to be disagreeable, but you misinterpreted my comment about this issue being a good test for loyalty to the governor. He has gone further than anyone expected him to, and I doubt very much that he will be lobbying any of the legislators on it. He made his point first when the legislation was proposed by saying "I'll sign it." and then he stepped farther forward yesterday with the Post Op-Ed and his Senate testimony. Everybody knows where the governor stands now, and the governor will know who stands with him and who stands against him. The teams will have been picked, now let's play ball. I myself will be...

Standing with the Gov., Maryland

John Wagner: Thanks for the clarification. O'Malley has said that he is, in fact, talking to individual legislators about this issue. Whether that constitutes "lobbying" is probably open to debate.

_______________________

Victim's pain: Also, there are some victim's families who actually -campaign- to end the death penalty. So ... by those who the death penalty to ease victims' pain are, in some cases, doing the opposite. It's not so straightforward.

John Wagner: Thanks for your thoughts. There was a family that fit this description at yesterday's hearings.

_______________________

DNA technology: It's too easy to focus on the technology. So often we don't have DNA evidence. That means we'll end up with convictions like those that have been quashed in Illinois. In the Illinois cases, there was irrefutable evidence. Don't you wonder, like I do, how many cases of wrongful conviction are out there but will never be proven? This will continue.

John Wagner: The mention of Illinois reminds me that it was a Republican governor in that state, George Ryan, who imposed a moratorium on executions in 2000. So, yes, as brought out in a previous question, this issue does not break down strictly among party lines.

_______________________

John Wagner: Thanks for all your questions. That's it for now.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.