43 Comments - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 7:21 am: A good time to declare all killing is wrong. Forcing someone to spend the rest of their life in jail without ever seeing a way to freedom is the more severe punishment, in my opinion. - amalia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:01 am: The penalty must exist for two reasons. It must be available for decisions in cases of multiple murders, serial killers, mass murderers and other murders with additional heinous circumstances. Think the current Connecticut situation, or Gacy, and ask yourself if those people deserve to live after those crimes. Without a penalty, Gacy would still get to paint in prison. Not right. I’d also nominate for death whoever took, and likely killed the two little girls who remain missing from the south side of Chicago, the seemingly forgotten Diamond and Tionda Bradley. Second, life in prison means greater risk for prison guards. the penalty must exist in case of a very dangerous person and to prevent the lifer from killing a guard without any further penalty. Think it doesn’t happen? It’s a dangerous job guarding those who deserve to die. - bored now - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:17 am: i’m sorry, but how can we afford death penalty cases? i thought we were strapped for cash? death penalty cases cost a lot more than other cases, and the money goes out the door for years. what is the benefit? supposedly, the death penalty deters crime, but the evidence seems to suggest that there is no real deterrent value for criminals. it’s another feel-good law, it makes non-criminals feel better, but has little effect on the criminal element in society. that’s far too rich for my blood. it’s kind of sick that we have to spend so much money to no effect other than making some people feel better about being in the presence of other people who don’t look like them. illinois really can’t afford to be spending millions of dollars just to make some people feel better… - William - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:23 am: If DNA proves the person guilty then they should put to death..George Ryan should have reviewed every case before he commuted all the death sentences to life in prison…Keep the Death penalty in Illinois - x ace - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:33 am: Coles Co State’s Atty Ferguson says it all with “certain heinous crimes ‘ cry out’ for the death penalty.” That’s it, plain and simple. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:42 am: I’m not sure I see a real distinction between having the death penalty but not actually ever executing anyone or not having the death penalty. We haven’t had an execution for over a decade. At some point in time, the ability to start back up will erode. Assuming Pat Q doesn’t lift the moratorium, that would be 2014 as the earliest it would be lifted. How many people would need to be trained to carry out an execution then? - Gish - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:57 am: Wensicia- The human psyche is pretty resilient and many prisoners who are ‘lifers’ will adapt quite well to life in prison. They may even be ‘happy’ at times. I don’t think the dead have the same ability. On the other hand, the costs for trying a capital punishment case is pretty outrageous but necessary in the interest of fairness to the accused. There is no room for error when the punishment is death. Our inability to restore a citizen after execution pretty much demands no less. I guess I’ll lean towards removing the death penalty while eliminating any privileges/perks for inmates imprisoned for life without parole. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:05 am: This I don’t understand: “[Let’s] talk about the cost of the 18 murders that don’t occur every time someone is executed because we have the death penalty. Those are costs we’re saving,” said Boyd. Is he saying that every executed murderer would have committed 17 more? Or that every execution prevents 17 potential murderers? How is that even possible to quantify? This I do understand. –However, despite arguing that costs should not be an issue, local state’s attorney offices hold a financial interest in maintaining the law as it is. The Illinois Capital Litigation Trust Fund, which offers resources to defense attorneys and prosecutors to cover the cost of litigating death penalty cases, reimburses about $500,000 to $700,000 per case. The trust fund was created by the General Assembly.– That’s a very provocative statement — they want to keep the death penalty because they make money off of it? I shudder to think that’s true. I covered a number of death penalty cases and there were a few I wouldn’t have flinched at pulling the switch on Old Sparky myself. But the justice system is not perfect — they get it wrong sometimes. It’s not worth the risk of executing someone for a crime they didn’t commit. - Excessively Rabid - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:13 am: George Ryan unilaterally abolished the death penalty. The state has just never been willing to legally acknowledge it. What Ryan did was wrong wrong wrong from a constitutional perspective. But it’s clear that if Illinois were to resume executions, which it won’t, it’s still unable or unwilling to apply the death penalty fairly and accurately. Ask Rolando Cruz and Randy Steidl. I’ve supported the death penalty in the past, but I’m ready to give it up. And I’m repelled by some of the proponents’ arguments - if you execute someone who’s innocent, does that make a net gain of 17 murders saved? Those crimes that cry out for an execution are exactly the ones where public hysteria leads to wrongful convictions. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:14 am: The Illinois justice system is wrong often enough that it’s unfair to support the death penalty, as applied, in Illnois, even if you support it in principle. - amalia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:14 am: @Wordslinger..”They get it wrong sometimes.” I have never heard of someone wrongly executed in Illinois. However, I have heard of thousands of people murdered in Illinois over the years. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:27 am: – I have never heard of someone wrongly executed in Illinois. – They sure had Cruz lined up and ready to go, with Jim Ryan, Roland Burris and Joe Birkett trying to push it through. Seriously, the justice system in Illinois never gets it wrong? Why do they keep letting all these guys out of jail then? - dave - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:27 am: “[Let’s] talk about the cost of the 18 murders that don’t occur every time someone is executed because we have the death penalty. Those are costs we’re saving,” said Boyd. Oh my. This is blatantly untrue. Did any reporter actually ask Boyd to back that up? - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:28 am: It’s too expensive. It’s subject to errors. It puts DOC personnel in the position of premeditated killing. Even Russia has abolished it. Time to get with the rest of the civilized world. - Aldyth - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:29 am: Until we reach the point where our criminal justice system is infallible, we have no business imposing the death penalty. It’s awfully hard to take back when wrongfully applied. - amalia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 9:58 am: Cruz was not put to death. “the system” found that he was not guilty. but Cruz thinks that Dugan should be put to death. I read that this upsets the anti death penalty crowd. thousands of murdered people in Illinois are wrongly dead. I cry for them. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:06 am: “I think when you have momentum, you need to seize that momentum,” Raoul said. Interesting quote. Kwame is probably the one person in the House or Senate least likely to seize the momentum on anything. He’s made a career of avoiding tough decisions. He’s right out of TS Eliot — he has “seen the moment of [his] greatness flicker, and in short, [he] was afraid.” But maybe this is a whole new Kwame. - cover - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:08 am: It probably is time to pull the plug on the death penalty, pardon the pun. Even conservative commentator George Will wrote a few years ago that it needs to go away, making the argument to his fellow conservatives that the death penalty is a government program. Texas just let go of a 30-year inmate who had been wrongly convicted (of rape, not murder). In death penalty cases, even with all the legal process delays, it doesn’t take 30 years to execute someone - so there is indeed a risk of killing an innocent person. Change the maximum penalty to life in prison with no chance of parole. At least the opportunity still exists to free someone who is wrongly convicted. And though this should not be the primary reason for abolishing the death penalty, it also saves money for state and local governments, at a time when governments are strapped for cash. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:09 am: Life without possibility of parole (LWOP) was supposed to put the victims families at ease. However, there are some incidents where persons sentenced to LWOP have had their sentences commuted to time served. While we can debate the particular facts involved (Gindorf in Illinois and Ferrazza in Michigan to name a few) the fact that LWOP sometimes doesn’t mean what it says does NOT put victims families at ease. I am not a fan of the death penalty for all the reasons others have mentioned above. How do you propose, however, to ease victims families horror at the thought of their “monster” being released? LWOP was supposed to ease their fears. If there are avenues for convicted criminals to be released under LWOP can we still call it that? - gfalkes - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:13 am: First, according to press reports, there are 27 peer-reviewed studies which show a deterrent effect, showing that between 3 and 18 murders do not occur in response to each execution. Second, there have been no exonerations since the reforms were put into place after George Ryan’s blanket commutations. Third, I suggest that IDOC personnel are more supportive of the death penalty than ANOTHER term of life for an inmate who kills one of their own. Fourth, prosecutors receive very little of the Capital Litigation trust funds, it overwhelmingly goes to the defense to assure that they have adequate resources to defend a capital murder. Check with the treasurer, there is no evidence that financial considerations are at work here. Finally, the reason there have been no executions is that appeals take a long time and Gov. Ryan commuted everyone who would have been in the pipeline. Unless you propose we do away with the appeals process, something that is both unconstitutional and morally wrong, then the fact that we’ve had no executions since the commutations is evidence of nothing other than that the system is doing its job and assuring that the guilty are punished and the exonerated go free. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:22 am: The deterrent argument is interesting. Of course, if you chopped both hands off any thief, that would probably deter a lot of stealing (and definitely would prevent them from doing it again if they got out of jail). But that sounds pretty barbaric. I for one would not view a society as civilized if it engaged in that practice. It seems that in a civilized society “deterrent” probably should not be the deciding factor when deciding factor when dealing with criminal matters. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:30 am: –First, according to press reports, there are 27 peer-reviewed studies which show a deterrent effect, showing that between 3 and 18 murders do not occur in response to each execution.– Who conducted them? Nostradamus? Karnak? How does one get the ability to peer into the future and predict murders, anyway? You can churn out studies on anything for a price. I believe the Tobacco Institute had loads of them as to the benign nature of their product. Publish or perish. - Logical Thinker - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:32 am: It didn’t happen in Illinois (it happened in CT), however, if there was ever a case like the one where a family of 4 was held hostage for 12+ hours, the wife and daughter raped, and the bodies set on fire–all of which did happen–in the State of Illinois, there should absolutely, positively be the death penalty to punish such an offender. The thought of a life sentence for such an evil person is disgusting. - Christine Kaplan - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:35 am: Its all about revenge, pure and simple and revenge has no place in our justice system. - winco - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:39 am: It is irresponsible to use victims’ families as a pawn in this argument. There is no doubt that many, probably most, relatives of murder victims want the defendants executed. But victims don’t decide punishments. If they did, I would have drawn and quartered the kid who stole my kid’s bike (or cut his hand off). Plus, I have trouble figuring out why some murder victims’ families are entitled to get to see a loved one’s murderer killed, but others are not. In other words, I don’t like politicians (state’s attorneys) deciding which victims are sympathetic enough to seek the death penalty on their murderer, and which aren’t. - doug dobmeyer - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 10:41 am: The death penalty serves no purpose than revenge killing. Geo ryan is a hero! His other faults put him prison to rot. But hedD will always be a hero in my book…from a tried and true Democrat…Green guy. - MrJM - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:02 am: If the death penalty brings just one victim back to life then it’s all worth it. – MrJM - dupage dan - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:10 am: Mr Dobmeyer, I may not bother you that George Ryan commuted the sentences of those convicted murderers for one reason only - to curry sympathy from a jury pool that was to be seated to determine his guilt or innocence in a criminal trial. Such cynicism should not be rewarded with any comments at all. It does bother me. However, the deed has been done. From a practical perspective, those of you who want the death penalty abolished and who use the “life without parole” sentence to mollify the victims families (or society in general) how do you satisy their concern when there are convicted murderers who were sentenced to LWOP who are now being released? What does Life Without Parole mean to you? If it doesn’t mean WITHOUT PAROLE, then is that a lie? - dupage dan - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:12 am: An argument can be made that all prison sentences are revenge based. Maybe the convicted criminals should all just get counseling. - gfalkes - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:17 am: wordslinger, none other than liberal icon and U of Chicago professor Cass Sunstein appears to argue that their is a deterent effect. There are studies the other way to, to be sure, but the fairest analysis is that there is a split between economists and social scientists over methodology. IF you care to base you opinion on facts rather than raw emotion, then check out this NY TIMES article. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html - Secret Square - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:23 am: “George Ryan is a hero” I beg to differ on that. Even if one agrees with his actions regarding the death penalty, the fact remains that he performed them in the LEAST “heroic” manner possible — on his next to last day in office, when there could be no further political consequences or fallout, and after dragging hundreds of victim’s families through those Prisoner Review Board hearings that turned out to be just for show. Now, if Ryan had decided to run for a second term and had cleared death row BEFORE the election, and lost the election as a result, then I would consider that at least somewhat “heroic.” If the person performing an action, however good or praiseworthy it may be, assumes no risk or has nothing to lose by it, then I’m not so sure it qualifies as “heroism.” - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:40 am: GFalkes, there are plenty of professors in the article that you linked that are quoted as saying that the studies are nonsense, so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. In fact, on balance, the article strikes me as exposing the shortcomings of the studies rather than validating them, whether they’re conducted by loony liberals or crazy conservatives. There’s no “raw emotion” in my belief that they’re bogus. I think it’s ridiculous to pretend you can put a “3-18″ murders deterred per execution on the basis of some economic theory. You think most murderers sit down beforehand with green eye shades on and calculate the cost/benefit ratio before they blow someone’s head off? Like I said before, to me, it’s an example of publish or perish. - Loop Lady - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:43 am: Although Ryan is to be commended for postponing the carrying out of death sentencing (giving Obama the chance to rise above the fray and distinguish himself, aka start the major career boost) I am suspicious of the timimg of his benevolence given the criminal charges pending against him at that time,to which he was tried and later convicted. It was part penance, public relations to the potential jury pool, and just the right thing to do. The State should not be about the business of death. LWOP is more humane, albeit aggravating for murder victims families. Abolish it and improve the criminal justice system and the potential for rehabilitation of inmates to curb recidivism… - amalia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:46 am: “George Ryan is a hero.” Doug, that is simply delusional. What Ryan did was to make a blanket decision ignoring the facts in each case. To take the flip side of this action, think about someone making a blanket decision to not review cases where the death penalty was given and letting everyone be put to death. How would you feel about that? Case by case basis. that is the action of a hero, which Ryan is not. Logical Thinker has it right….if the case that is currently in play in Connecticut, with the victim on camera in a bank asking for money cause she was in a hostage situation, had happened in Illinois, the death penalty would be shouted for. And, this may happen for the vicious, evil jerk who murdered the retired security guard and the police evidence official. The evil one did it to cover up his other crimes. the death penalty sure is a deterrent to prevent someone from doing it again. - Anon - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 11:55 am: You People Who want to continue turning Criminals loose Repeatedly Should Consider that their future Victim might just be one of your own loved ones. Executing a Death Sentence will most certainly prevent that particular criminal from ever preying on more innocent victims; any additional deterrent effect (real or imagined) is just icing on the Cake. In my Humble Opinion, the people who advocate setting criminals free are partially responsible for the future act of those individuals. - Steve Downstate - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 12:23 pm: The Illinois bishops conference (the Catholic Conference of Illinois) has taken a position supporting abolition of the death penalty, much to their credit. Wish, however, they would fight FOR that as loudly as they fought against marriage equality a month ago. I’m hoping for too much there, maybe! - D.P. Gumby - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 1:41 pm: two points– 1. 23 exonerations in Dallas County in a range of cases because District Attorney Craig Watkins established a Conviction Integrity division w/in the office and years worth of DNA was preserved. I do not see any of the Illinois State’s Attorneys following this practice or demonstrating the same integrity to work cooperatively w/ Wrongful Conviction programs. Doing so might give their arguments credibility. 2. Which murders are not heinous if you are the victim’s family? It’s easy to say Gacy or Speck deserved death, but where do you go from there? Where do you draw the line and who draws it? Life w/o Parole seems equally irrational as the death penalty when we consider the number of elderly inmates in prison hospitals. - amalia - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 2:32 pm: @D.P.Gumby 1) while Illinois State’s Attorneys may not have the same set up as in Dallas County, they are doing lots of work re the integrity of the process. you might also make the integrity argument for the defense attorneys who are against mandatory DNA collection. not all of them are, but many are. 2)the line is drawn by the laws of the state and the court cases, as in there are factors besides the killing itself. also State’s Attorneys have the power to decide, as with cases generally. your comment on Life w/o Parole undercuts your position, I believe. Would you have us release them just because they are elderly? I thought the argument against the death penalty was the life without parole crowd, those who, in my opinion, don’t think about the lives of prison guards. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 2:36 pm: That prison guard argument is interesting. Apparently, a lifer will kill a guard, but somebody on death row will not (per the argument). That may be the case, but it seems counter-intuitive. - D.P. Gumby - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 3:23 pm: 1) opposing Death Penalty does not, ipso facto, mean support for life w/o parole; 2) Mandatory collection of DNA is a separate civil liberties issue question. I believe it is done after conviction; debate is at arrest. A reasonable debate. 3) One flaw in Illinois is that each county’s State’s Atty can choose to seek death penalty (which then kicks in extra resources for both state and defendant) or “de-death” which gives no extra resources for defendant. No consistency in how state’s attorney exercises discretion. Statute may give “standards” for when death sentence, but not when discretion exercised. 4) lives of prison guards red herring argument (though serious for the guards). Which death row prisoner was it at Pontiac who killed guard to delay execution as he then had to be tried for the new murder? - downstate hack - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 3:57 pm: This is a somewhat frivolous debate at a time when the Illinois legislature should be concentrating on the budget issues. There is no clear mandate to do anything immediately on the death penalty, so lets have a rational debate AFTER the budget crisis is solved. There is no need for quick action. Let the victims families be heard. - tired of press - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 5:10 pm: I am surprised that no one has mentioned the fact that Illinois has the highest exoneration rate of the 36 states with death penalties (6%). And if you think this doesn’t matter, or that it is a frivolous debate, then you should talk to some of those 20 individuals, who combined spent centuries wrongly imprisoned and now are out of prison with their lives destroyed. We get it wrong because, as someone said above, the same process that makes us go after certain killers with fervor causes us to rush to judgment, make mistakes….and never admit them. These men have not even got apologies from the district attorneys, although a few have gotten civil settlements. If you recognize how incompetent and corrupt Illinois is at every level, you should oppose the death penalty because you should recognize that prosecutors often can’t get that right either. - archibald.jones - Wednesday, Jan 5, 11 @ 8:57 pm: And now no more shall Illinois tinker with the machinery of death. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.