Post by Anja on Jun 12, 2006 10:23:28 GMT -5
A question of fairness
Shelby County District Attorney Robby Owens is right: There's something
fundamentally unfair in the current predicament of LaSamuel Gamble.
Gamble is on Alabama's Death Row for his role in the 1996 robbery-murder
of John Burleson and Janice Littleton at a Shelby County pawn shop. But
the actual triggerman - Gamble's co-defendant, Marcus Pressley - won't be
executed.
Pressley's death sentence won't be carried out because of a U.S. Supreme
Court ruling that said people can't be executed for crimes they committed
before they were 18. As it happens, Pressley was 16 at the time of the
John's 280 Pawn Shop holdup; Gamble 19.
Owens testified at a hearing Wednesday that he doesn't believe it's fair
to execute Gamble if Pressley can't also be put to death. "Both deserve to
be on Death Row, but it is simple equity - it is not fair to leave the
person on Death Row who didn't kill anyone and take the person off Death
Row who did," Owens said.
Owens' concern about fairness in death sentences is commendable. It would
be great to see more prosecutors take courageous stands on this issue. But
it's a dangerous road to go down. Once you enter the thicket of fairness,
the death penalty becomes impossible to defend.
It's too easy to find a defendant sentenced to death for one ghastly crime
- and to find someone who was spared execution despite an equally ghastly
(or even more ghastly) crime. It doesn't take many cases to conclude the
makeup of death row isn't always determined by the horror of a particular
crime and the guilt of a particular defendant. All kinds of factors - such
as the race of the victims, the quality of legal defense, even the
location of the crime - can play a role.
That's not fair.
Certainly, Owens can make a case for why Gamble got the death penalty in
the first place. Security cameras captured the robbery, and they showed
Gamble calmly and coldly taking part in the crime, if not pulling the
trigger.
But Owens makes an equally compelling case for why it's unfair to execute
Gamble for this crime, while Pressley escapes the ultimate punishment.
Unfortunately, it's a case that can be made for too many of the defendants
now sitting on death row.
(source: Opinion, The Birmingham News)
Shelby County District Attorney Robby Owens is right: There's something
fundamentally unfair in the current predicament of LaSamuel Gamble.
Gamble is on Alabama's Death Row for his role in the 1996 robbery-murder
of John Burleson and Janice Littleton at a Shelby County pawn shop. But
the actual triggerman - Gamble's co-defendant, Marcus Pressley - won't be
executed.
Pressley's death sentence won't be carried out because of a U.S. Supreme
Court ruling that said people can't be executed for crimes they committed
before they were 18. As it happens, Pressley was 16 at the time of the
John's 280 Pawn Shop holdup; Gamble 19.
Owens testified at a hearing Wednesday that he doesn't believe it's fair
to execute Gamble if Pressley can't also be put to death. "Both deserve to
be on Death Row, but it is simple equity - it is not fair to leave the
person on Death Row who didn't kill anyone and take the person off Death
Row who did," Owens said.
Owens' concern about fairness in death sentences is commendable. It would
be great to see more prosecutors take courageous stands on this issue. But
it's a dangerous road to go down. Once you enter the thicket of fairness,
the death penalty becomes impossible to defend.
It's too easy to find a defendant sentenced to death for one ghastly crime
- and to find someone who was spared execution despite an equally ghastly
(or even more ghastly) crime. It doesn't take many cases to conclude the
makeup of death row isn't always determined by the horror of a particular
crime and the guilt of a particular defendant. All kinds of factors - such
as the race of the victims, the quality of legal defense, even the
location of the crime - can play a role.
That's not fair.
Certainly, Owens can make a case for why Gamble got the death penalty in
the first place. Security cameras captured the robbery, and they showed
Gamble calmly and coldly taking part in the crime, if not pulling the
trigger.
But Owens makes an equally compelling case for why it's unfair to execute
Gamble for this crime, while Pressley escapes the ultimate punishment.
Unfortunately, it's a case that can be made for too many of the defendants
now sitting on death row.
(source: Opinion, The Birmingham News)