Northern Correctional Institution
Site of Death Row
Photo credit: CT Dept. of Correction
Posted 5/26/09
Connecticut’s death penalty debate, jolted into reality in 2005 with the execution of serial killer Michael Ross, logged a new chapter last week when the State Senate voted 19 to 17 to give final legislative approval to a bill that would abolish the death penalty, replacing it with life in prison without possibility of release for future convictions.
Longtime advocates of this change hailed the achievement of pushing this controversial bill through the House and Senate in a matter of weeks, but their celebration was cut short when Republican Gov. Jodi Rell weighed in. Rell, long a supporter of the death penalty said she would veto the measure when it wends its way to her desk.
“I appreciate the passionate beliefs of people on both sides of the debate,” Rell said. “I fully understand the concerns and deeply held convictions of those who would like to see the death penalty abolished in Connecticut.” However, Rell quickly added that she also understands “the anguish and outrage of the families of victims who believe as I do, that there are certain crimes so heinous—so fundamentally revolting—that the death penalty is warranted.”
Barring some dramatic vote changes, it would appear a veto override by the legislature is not in the cards this year.
State Rep. Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven), co-chair of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, and a leading advocate of abolition of the death penalty, is hoping against hope that Rell might change her mind. “I urge Gov. Rell to reach out to our state’s prosecutors and judges before taking action,” he said. “Ask these front-line professionals their off-the-record opinions on whether anyone will be ever be executed in Connecticut,” said Lawlor. “I believe she will be told the Connecticut death penalty is a false promise.”
Death penalty sentiment in Connecticut may be evolving and that makes it difficult for politicians who prefer being on the “right side” of every issue, if they can figure out how the public feels. In November 2007, a Quinnipiac University poll revealed that 63% of voters surveyed favored the death penalty with 27% opposed. However, when those same individuals were asked which punishment for murder they favored, 47% said the death penalty, 44% said life in prison without parole.
If voters are conflicted, the lengthy debate on the death penalty might only have aggravated that dilemma, because good points were made by both sides.
Lawmakers arguing for abolition ask how can the state convict someone of murder, then turn around and kill that individual in the name of justice? They say publicity surrounding death row inmates gives these individuals attention they do not deserve. Lawlor claimed Michael Ross’s decision to give up his appeals and allow execution was a narcissistic act, designed to keep the focus on himself instead of his innocent victims. Opponents of the death penalty said its finality could prevent new evidence, such as DNA testing, from determining that a person convicted of murder actually was innocent.
Supporters of the death penalty said life in prison without the possibility of parole is too lenient for particularly awful murders. Sen. John Kissel (R-Enfield) said homeless people, living in the cold without enough food or medicine, have a life that is tougher than convicted murderers, who receive shelter, food, and medical attention. They also asked what punishment could be meted out to a convicted murderer serving life in prison, who goes on to kill a prison guard or correctional facility staffer? They also warned that if life in prison without the possibility of release becomes the new “top penalty”, do-gooders may claim it is too harsh, and ask lawmakers to soften the sentence for murder.
If Rell stands by her May 22nd statement and vetoes the death penalty abolition bill, that likely will be the end of the debate for this year. However, Lawlor claims the tide already has turned and that the death penalty already is dead.
“Both houses of the General Assembly have cast unprecedented bipartisan votes to abolish our death penalty,” he said. “That fact will surely mean that no death penalty case will be successful from this point forward in the state’s courts.” Lawlor may be correct, but near the end of the Michael Ross case, some death penalty opponents confidently predicted he would never be executed Yet Ross was executed by lethal injection on May 13, 2005.