Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 14, 2006 6:08:30 GMT -5
Death penalty alternatives studied
By TOM BALDWIN
Gannett State Bureau
TRENTON
The death penalty forces victims' loved ones to relive their pain as killers wade for decades through an appeals process where a murderer's every right is safeguarded while the long-dead victim has none, a special panel heard Wednesday.
And with the death penalty -- as opposed to life without parole -- the loved ones walk in fear that appeals will deliver the killer back to share their space and even inflict harm, the testimony went.
Richard Pompelio, director of a group called Legal Advocates Protecting the Rights of Crime Victims, cited Toms River killer Robert Marshall.
Marshall is the one-time insurance man who made death row after a jury convicted him of arranging to have his wife murdered by a hired gunman on the Garden State Parkway in 1984.
"Marshall not only has escaped the death penalty, but he will probably see freedom in time to enjoy it. And his wife, Marie, is just a painful memory in the hearts of her sons," said Pompelio, urging that life without parole replace the death drip.
Marshall would be eligible for parole in 2014 -- seven years hence -- when he would be 75.
"Our family was forced to relive the nightmare three times," said Joanne Barlieb of Atco, whose mother was shot three times and killed in 1985 when assaulted by a man attempting to rob the convenience store where the woman worked.
"I cringe to hear you say that," Barlieb said when asked if she feared the day when the killer, who won an appeal to get off death row, may walk free in another 14 years. "It's a slap in the face," she said.
A parade of witnesses, including some well-known state lawmakers, spoke out against the state's 1982 death penalty law. The Legislature last December voted for a moratorium.
The Death Penalty Study Commission, drawn from a broad spectrum, is conducting hearings on where the Legislature should now navigate.
"The death penalty in New Jersey is unworkable," said state Sen. Robert Martin, R-Morris Plains, citing how defenders are often not up to the job against potentially overly vigorous prosecutors in front of ill-equipped judges and juries.
He said years of trying to fine-tune the death penalty have always failed. "It has erected a nightmare for many of the victims' families. It should be abolished," Martin said.
"In 1982, I voted to reinstate the death penalty in New Jersey. I was wrong," said state Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Elizabeth.
"We now have an opportunity to right the wrong. . . . The death penalty should be replaced by a life sentence without parole," Lesniak said. He said the death penalty is not a deterrent to murder, costs too much and that "there is no way to create a foolproof system to prevent the execution of an innocent person."
"It is not morally acceptable for a civilized society to kill," said former state Attorney General Robert Del Tufo, who said it is arbitrary, not a deterrent, too costly and plagued with errors.
Del Tufo noted 80 percent of death-penalty decisions over the past 20 years have been reversed, striking fear in victims' family members who know that a death-house inmate who moves to a life sentence has a chance to reach the streets.
That, he said, would not happen if the killer got life without parole.
"The odds that someone will be released under a life-without-parole sentence are so low as to be little more than theoretical," Del Tufo said.
It was not clear when the commission will advance its suggestions to lawmakers.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine opposes the death penalty.
Reach Tom Baldwin at tbaldwi@gannett.com
Published: September 14. 2006 3:10AM
By TOM BALDWIN
Gannett State Bureau
TRENTON
The death penalty forces victims' loved ones to relive their pain as killers wade for decades through an appeals process where a murderer's every right is safeguarded while the long-dead victim has none, a special panel heard Wednesday.
And with the death penalty -- as opposed to life without parole -- the loved ones walk in fear that appeals will deliver the killer back to share their space and even inflict harm, the testimony went.
Richard Pompelio, director of a group called Legal Advocates Protecting the Rights of Crime Victims, cited Toms River killer Robert Marshall.
Marshall is the one-time insurance man who made death row after a jury convicted him of arranging to have his wife murdered by a hired gunman on the Garden State Parkway in 1984.
"Marshall not only has escaped the death penalty, but he will probably see freedom in time to enjoy it. And his wife, Marie, is just a painful memory in the hearts of her sons," said Pompelio, urging that life without parole replace the death drip.
Marshall would be eligible for parole in 2014 -- seven years hence -- when he would be 75.
"Our family was forced to relive the nightmare three times," said Joanne Barlieb of Atco, whose mother was shot three times and killed in 1985 when assaulted by a man attempting to rob the convenience store where the woman worked.
"I cringe to hear you say that," Barlieb said when asked if she feared the day when the killer, who won an appeal to get off death row, may walk free in another 14 years. "It's a slap in the face," she said.
A parade of witnesses, including some well-known state lawmakers, spoke out against the state's 1982 death penalty law. The Legislature last December voted for a moratorium.
The Death Penalty Study Commission, drawn from a broad spectrum, is conducting hearings on where the Legislature should now navigate.
"The death penalty in New Jersey is unworkable," said state Sen. Robert Martin, R-Morris Plains, citing how defenders are often not up to the job against potentially overly vigorous prosecutors in front of ill-equipped judges and juries.
He said years of trying to fine-tune the death penalty have always failed. "It has erected a nightmare for many of the victims' families. It should be abolished," Martin said.
"In 1982, I voted to reinstate the death penalty in New Jersey. I was wrong," said state Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Elizabeth.
"We now have an opportunity to right the wrong. . . . The death penalty should be replaced by a life sentence without parole," Lesniak said. He said the death penalty is not a deterrent to murder, costs too much and that "there is no way to create a foolproof system to prevent the execution of an innocent person."
"It is not morally acceptable for a civilized society to kill," said former state Attorney General Robert Del Tufo, who said it is arbitrary, not a deterrent, too costly and plagued with errors.
Del Tufo noted 80 percent of death-penalty decisions over the past 20 years have been reversed, striking fear in victims' family members who know that a death-house inmate who moves to a life sentence has a chance to reach the streets.
That, he said, would not happen if the killer got life without parole.
"The odds that someone will be released under a life-without-parole sentence are so low as to be little more than theoretical," Del Tufo said.
It was not clear when the commission will advance its suggestions to lawmakers.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine opposes the death penalty.
Reach Tom Baldwin at tbaldwi@gannett.com
Published: September 14. 2006 3:10AM