home

The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Tue Nov 22, 2005 at 12:06:54 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Newsday reports:

In the 23 years since New Jersey reinstated the death penalty, the law has cost taxpayers about $253 million and executed no one, according to a new study.

"Money For Nothing? The Financial Cost of New Jersey's Death Penalty" was released Monday by New Jersey Policy Perspective, a research group.....From a strictly financial perspective, it is hard to reach a conclusion other than this: New Jersey taxpayers over the past 23 years have paid more than a quarter of a billion dollars on a capital punishment system that has executed no one.

The study is available here. [Via Sentencing Law and Policy.]

< Memo: Bush Planned to Bomb Al-Jazeera TV Network | Texecution: Was He Innocent? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty | 33 comments (33 topical)
    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    interesting, but not really anything new. it has been long established that death penalty cases constitute the single most expensive of all criminal cases. what i found much more interesting was a glossed over statistic: 90% of criminal defendents in new jersey are indigent, and qualify for aid from the state public defender's office. i'd be curious to know what % of all indigent's arrested are actually indicted, vs those not indigent.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#2)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    At least it hasn't cost any lives, or people executed in error.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    "At least it hasn't cost any lives," edger, how many guards and/or other inmates have lost their lives at the hands of these un-executed murderers over the past 23 years? I don't know either, but it's sure to be more than zero.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#4)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Yes, because they're all Snidely Whiplash / Hannibal Lecter, motivated by nothing other than an unholy desire to kill, kill, kill. I'm sure thousands have died.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    You're right Sarc - I don't know. And as you said, neither do you. But you assume, without evidence, that more than zero have been murdered by people on death row in New Jersey. Well, there are, as far as I can find out, 14 death row inmates in that state. Life is not pleasant for them, nor should it be. But I can find no evidence nor records of any of them killing anyone since they've been there. And the numbers of death row inmates elsewhere convicted in error is enough to cause concern that we can neverbe to careful. I think erring on the side of caution is necessary.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#6)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    edger, small quibble, I said/meant un-executed murderers in general, not only unexecuted death row guys. But, anyway, "TRENTON -- Ambrose Harris was indicted today on murder charges in the killing of fellow death-row inmate Robert (Mudman) Simon last month, Mercer County Prosecutor Daniel G. Giaquinto announced." Ambrose is 300+ lbs. and jumped off a table onto Simon's head a half-dozen times or so until it squashed like a pumpkin. So, at least one.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Sarc - it will happen, and does. I agree. It also happened to my girlfriend Cara. But it is not a small quibble to the 20 in Florida, and who knows how many elsewhere, convicted and sentenced to death in error. We can't give them their lives back if they are executed, just as no one can restore Cara... nor would executing anyone restore her... LWOP, as far as I am concerned, is the way to go on this.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#8)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    edger, my understanding has been that about 23 innocents have been executed in the US between 1900 and 1992 link You have a different understanding?

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    ...btw, your note about Cara did not go unrecognized. My heart goes out to you, her family, and all those who were close to her.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#10)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Is that all? Oh... well... only 23...no problem then...it's only a little number...not even three digits...nothing to get all worked up over, is it? Huh?

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Sarc... thank you, BTW. Whether 2300, 230, 23 or 2.3 or even 1, it's too many mistakes, IMHO.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    edger, you went from a reasonable converstation to one of snarks. You choose to infer something I did not imply and make an ad hominum attack based on your faulty inference. Many more than 23 have been murdered by un-executed murderers during the time the 23 innocents were executed. But, to respond in kind, that's nothing to get all worked up over, is it?

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    OK, our posts crossed, sorry for the in-kind snark.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#14)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Here's another cheery prison slaying by an un-executed murderer: link

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Sarc - it may have been 23, I don't know, and I've seen no documentation on that number. I suspect that all we can know if the number 23 (or whatever it is) is correct is that those are only the ones KNOWN about. By definition, if we didn't know they were innocent, we would not know if we were executing an innocent. I've also seen no documentation on how many innocents were convicted but never overturned, Because it likely would not exist.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#16)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    edger, I gave a bad link before what do you think of this? link

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Again I say, in my opinion LWOP would be erring on the side of caution. It is the only way to know we don't execute innocent people. It does not satisfy a desire for retribution or revenge, I know. But that is not the purpose of justice.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#18)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Fair enough. I'm done now. I've hogged more than my share of band-width on this one.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#19)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Sarc - I posted that here on September 16 (scroll to the bottom of the thread).

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Thanks, edger, I had bookmarked the site but had forgotten that it was you that had given it to me. We've had this convo before...

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    I fail to see what executing innocent people has to do with anything else mentioned. And BTW, "killing fellow death-row inmate " is hard to get worked up about as an argument against the death penalty. I would think fiscally responsible repubs wopuld realize that if it costs more $$ to kill folks than not kill folks they would all be for LWOP. I don't expect them to consider the moral argument of killing innocents along the way.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#22)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    Thanks, Sarc, for the lively discussion :) I hadn't intended any snark, BTW...

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#23)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    No problem, enjoy the holiday.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#24)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    The exchange between Sarcastic and Edgar only goes to reinforce the need for a case by case determination. In cases where someone else is going to die, tis the moral thing to sentence to death, at least that way the guilty party is the one who dies. When there is a question about if someone else will die, then LWOP is the way to go. The problem with the death penalty isn't the use of it, but rather the failure of the rear guard of clemency. Sorry for your loss Edgar.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#25)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    BigTex, If a court or a jury convicts and sentences death for a murder, we then have two deaths. And if the conviction and/or sentence was made in error, and later discovered to be so, it's too late to redress the error. But if LWOP had been the sentence at least the person wrongly convicted can be released. Not so if he/she has been executed. Personally? My attitude is that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. Revenge or retribution never solves anything...

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#26)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    If a court or a jury convicts and sentences death for a murder, we then have two deaths.
    Agreed, but it is not on point to the issue raised. The number of deaths isn't important. What is important is the status of the deceased. When a new victim is going to die, morality cries for the life of the killer so that the next innocent is spared. To do otherwise is to condemn an innocent so that the guitly may live.
    But if LWOP had been the sentence at least the person wrongly convicted can be released. Not so if he/she has been executed.
    Once again we agree, but looking at the situation from a morality standpoint, we must go with the method that leads to the least amount of innocent people dieing. To frame the issue even more percisley, the question isn't one of capitol punishment, but rather one of correcting the system as a whole to bring the amount of innocent's killed to a minimum. That's not to say that we will ever reach zero, but rather we must look at changing all parts of the system to find the best combination. Right now, and this could change as more info becomes available or time causes behaviroal patterns to change, the better course of action is to see to it that DNA testing is available to all who are convicted via DNA evidence, and to allow for easier commutations to LW/OP for those who are no longer a danger to kill anyone. Remember, the ultimate goal is to reduce the amount of innocent victims as a whole. One aspect is the falsely convicted being put to death. That has to be weighed against the amount of people who would be killed if the condemned were allowed to live. As it stands now, capitol punishment gives the lower total, so the efforts towards reform need to be directed towards reducing the number of falsely condemned from being killed, not to ending capitol punishment outright. To end CP outright would be the greater offense to morality.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#27)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    I just find it amazing that some people are willing to accept the state murdering innocent men and women. Sorry, that is a power I would rather the state not have. Pragmatism aside, your embrace of the death penalty as a means to control the number of innocents murdered smacks of something far more sinister. You have decided you know which innocent people should be murdered.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#28)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    You have decided you know which innocent people should be murdered.
    Not which, but how many. Which is as few as possible.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#29)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    Nooo... you have decided which. By expressly stating that the death penalty is the way to minimize innocents murdered, you endorse the idea that those on death row, regardless of innocence or guilt, are the ones to tip the scales. Further, you are willing to grant that power to the state. I do not know about you, but having the state wield the power of life or death via sanctioned execution regardless of potential innocence I find scary as hell.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#30)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    sorry bigtex, but what planet are you from, really? "better that 11 guilty men should go free, than one innocent man should be convicted." who said that escapes me at the moment, but i believe it is from an early SC case. CP is hardly "moral", where on earth did you come up with that nonsense? were that the case, every religion throughout history, and today, would endorse its use. strangely, they don't. go figure. the basic problem with CP is that it is impossible to devise a fool proof system, to insure that no innocent person will ever be executed. absent divine intervention, humans are fallable, they will make mistakes. CP can't be undone. if it's justice you seek, LWOP should fill the bill. if it's merely revenge, that isn't the purpose of the code of laws we have. the "eye for an eye" biblical quote is one of the most misused: it was a warning, not a call to arms. god recognized that revenge would only cause a downward spiral, hence the warning. as noted by another, good, fiscally responsible republicans should be appalled by the cost of CP. contrary to their talking points, there are no fiscally responsible republicans.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#31)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:23 PM EST
    CP is hardly "moral", where on earth did you come up with that nonsense?
    The writings of the late Pope John Paul II. He was staunchly opposed to CP, but did allow for exceptions when CP was moral.
    "...the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: In other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society." --Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, 1995
    Also, the Cahtechism of the Catholic Church allows for CP
    Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
    If you read my posts, they are in line with this belief. The scheme in which I support CP is under two elements. 1) The goal of the system is to keep the amount of innocent death to a minimum, and 2) That CP should only be used when the question isn't if someone is going to die (CP or not CP) but rather who is going to die (the condemned or his next victim.) In otherwords CP should only be used when it "is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor."
    [I]f it's justice you seek, LWOP should fill the bill. if it's merely revenge, that isn't the purpose of the code of laws we have. the "eye for an eye" biblical quote is one of the most misused: it was a warning, not a call to arms.
    But what if I seek neither Justice nor Revenge? My desire with CP is morality. Justice and revenge are secondary and not existant concerns respectivly. I would agree that CP is not used in the method I support. But the proper use of CP is moral, in fact morality cries for it. The proper use of CP reduces the amount of innocents killed overall. Does that mean I have decided which innocents should die? Perhaps. Certinally it means I have decided which innocents I am willing to see die. However, it is no different than those who say no CP ever. They too, have decided which innocents should die, only they chose the other group of innocents.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#32)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:24 PM EST
    Certinally it means I have decided which innocents I am willing to see die.
    It is a powerful thing, to stand in the god's shoes.

    Re: The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty (none / 0) (#33)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:24 PM EST
    It is a powerful thing, to stand in the god's shoes.
    To stand in God's shoes? No, that's not me. This is just the willingness to grapple wit the cold, hard truth that innocents will die, and hopefully in the process see some way to change the system to reduce the number of innocents that die. We stand in the same shoes, the difference is which set of innocents we would rather see die. It's a ugly decision, but one that has to be made before action to reduce the amount of innocent deaths can be taken. But here is a question. Innocents will die. That fact cannot be avoided. Certinally, innocents will die under a scheme I espouse. I acknowledge taht fact with a great disdain for it's existance. Are you, or any of those who oppose CP, willing to acknowledge that innocents will die under the scheme that you espouse? Under the scheme I espouse action can be taken to improve the system. A few direct examples are DNA testing for those who are sentenced with DNA evidence. Greater use of clemency when the condmned ahve reformed. Looking at evidenct that points to innocence, even if the judgment is final. What would you do under your scheme of no CP (and for some no LW/OP) to ensure no more innocent victims? The death of innocents cannot be avoided, all we can do is acknowledge it, and move in a direction to reduct the amount of inocents that die.

    The Exorbitant Cost of the Death Penalty | 33 comments (33 topical)