Post by SoulTrainOz on Jul 27, 2006 7:17:54 GMT -5
For those convicted of capital crimes, the chances of receiving the death penalty are much higher in the Waterbury judicial district than anywhere else in the state. Of the 7 men on Connecticut's death row, 5 were successfully prosecuted by the office of State's Attorney John Connelly.
The unfettered discretion that regional prosecutors have in seeking the death penalty and the subjective factors that might go into making that decision account in large part for the disparity.
U.S. attorneys, in contrast, must follow a fairly elaborate set of
guidelines, including approval from the Justice Department in Washington, before they can ask for the death penalty in a federal case. Other states have similar directives.
Connecticut should be in that league.
To his credit, Hartford Superior Court Judge Edward Mullarkey has agreed to hear a first-of-a-kind motion in the case of Jessie Campbell III that the absence of rules makes the Connecticut process of choosing who is marked for death unconstitutional.
In so doing, Judge Mullarkey has authorized Mr. Campbell's attorneys to subpoena 12 of the 13 regional prosecutors and Chief State's Attorney Christopher Morano to explain their personal standards for seeking the death penalty.
A jury in May convicted Mr. Campbell of murdering 2 Hartford women in 2004, but was deadlocked on whether to sentence him to death, as prosecutors wanted, or to life in prison without parole. The motion was filed in advance of a 2nd penalty hearing before a new jury in September.
A ruling by Judge Mullarkey in Mr. Campbell's favor would automatically trigger a life sentence. That would almost certainly be appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which in turn could determine, once and for all, whether the random nature of death penalty prosecutions is constitutional.
The Courant has long opposed capital punishment. But if the death penalty has to exist, there should be formalized procedures on its application.
(source: Editorial, Hartford Courant)
The unfettered discretion that regional prosecutors have in seeking the death penalty and the subjective factors that might go into making that decision account in large part for the disparity.
U.S. attorneys, in contrast, must follow a fairly elaborate set of
guidelines, including approval from the Justice Department in Washington, before they can ask for the death penalty in a federal case. Other states have similar directives.
Connecticut should be in that league.
To his credit, Hartford Superior Court Judge Edward Mullarkey has agreed to hear a first-of-a-kind motion in the case of Jessie Campbell III that the absence of rules makes the Connecticut process of choosing who is marked for death unconstitutional.
In so doing, Judge Mullarkey has authorized Mr. Campbell's attorneys to subpoena 12 of the 13 regional prosecutors and Chief State's Attorney Christopher Morano to explain their personal standards for seeking the death penalty.
A jury in May convicted Mr. Campbell of murdering 2 Hartford women in 2004, but was deadlocked on whether to sentence him to death, as prosecutors wanted, or to life in prison without parole. The motion was filed in advance of a 2nd penalty hearing before a new jury in September.
A ruling by Judge Mullarkey in Mr. Campbell's favor would automatically trigger a life sentence. That would almost certainly be appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which in turn could determine, once and for all, whether the random nature of death penalty prosecutions is constitutional.
The Courant has long opposed capital punishment. But if the death penalty has to exist, there should be formalized procedures on its application.
(source: Editorial, Hartford Courant)