Legislators debate need for capital punishment BY CHRIS MURINO Staff Writer People on both sides of the death penalty debate are striving to have their voices heard as the New Jersey Legislature inches toward abolishing capital punishment. On Dec. 3, after a hearing on the issue, the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee approved a bill by a vote of 8-4 that would abolish the death penalty and replace it with life in prison without parole. The bill will now go to the full Senate for a vote, which is likely to take place during the lameduck session of the Legislature. Although the Budget and Appropriations Committee voted along party lines, minority leader Leonard Lance (R-Hunterdon/Warren), one of the committee members, said there was no party stance. "Our caucus will not be taking a party position," Lance said. "Each member will vote by his or her conscience." The issue has been talked about for weeks and has been generating much debate, as expected. Five hundred clergy members from New Jersey recently signed an anti-death-penalty petition that was sent to all 120 legislators. Among the signees were two members of St. Barnabas Episcopal Church of Monmouth Junction, the Rev. William Breedlove and the Rev. Francis Hubbard. "It requires the government to be perfect," Hubbard said. "I don't think that's a realistic objective." "We have a good chance we're putting to death innocent people," Breedlove agreed. Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union), who sponsored the bill to abolish the death penalty, spoke about Brian Halsey at the hearing, a man who was convicted of murdering and sexually assaulting two children. "Only one juror refused to vote to sentence Halsey to death," Lesniak said. "Nineteen years later, DNA evidence proved Halsey did not commit the crime." Lance, however, has faith in the system. "I'm confident we have enough safeguards in our system that only those who are found guilty well beyond a shadow of doubt are on death row in New Jersey." Lance proposed an amendment to the bill during the hearings held on Monday, with more specific instances for when the death penalty should be used. "It was for a death by terrorists, a murder of a police officer or corrections official, and the murder of a child where the child is also a victim of sexual abuse," Lance said. "They're just as likely to convict an innocent person of killing a cop as anyone else," said Lesniak. "I usually agree with Lance, but in this case he makes no sense." Lance said he would prefer to have kept the system in place as it now stands, but was willing to compromise and meet people halfway. The amendment was tabled, however. There is also the issue of whether or not the victims' families want the death penalty. During Monday's hearing, many families stated that they would rather not have to go through the appeals process that follows a death sentence, saying it just makes things worse. "No amount of punishment is going to bring back the victims," Hubbard said. "It's the temptation to go with an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." "Most, not all, wanted to put an end to that world of pain and suffering," Lesniak said. "They would rather it just be finished with a sentence of life without parole." In January, the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission voted to abolish the death penalty. Another issue is the money that is used to keep the death penalty in place. Lesniak believes those resources should go elsewhere. "The additional costs will, in my opinion, be put to better use for [the fight against] gun running, drug dealing and gangs," Lesniak said. What about the impact of the death penalty on potential criminals? Does it make them think twice about committing a crime - is it a deterrent? "It's debatable," Lance said. "There is a lot of new evidence that seems to indicate that it does [deter crime]. Some say it doesn't." Lesniak does not believe the death penalty is a deterrent. "Terrorists fly planes into buildings," Lesniak said. "They could care less about the death penalty. It's not a deterrent to crime." New York Law School Professor Robert Blecker disagreed. Blecker, who is in favor of the death penalty, wrote a response to the commission, titled "But Did They Listen?" "Common sense and human nature obviously suggest death's special deterrent power," Blecker wrote. But is life in prison sufficient? Hubbard believes it is a suitable alternative to the death penalty because it will keep the public just as safe. He also believes that society can't put people to death with a system that doesn't work as well as it should. "We're all working with an imperfect instrument," Hubbard said. "The system is fraught with bias. The scales of justice [are] against poor people in general." Breedlove is bothered by society's willingness to perpetuate violence and wants to do something to stop it. He had participated in the civil rights movement during his time at the University of Chicago. "Jesus said, 'Love your enemies,' " Breedlove said. "I believe that. Death belongs to God. We need to take stands on things. I've been something of an activist for most of my life." Lesniak said he thinks the bill to abolish the death penalty will pass, although he did say it will be a close vote. Blecker has a different view. "I predict they will rush it through the lame-duck Legislature, but that eventually when the people realize what has been done in their name, they will react negatively," Blecker said. "And, long term, these abolitionist legislators, by subverting justice and the popular support for it, will be called to account at the polls." New Jersey has not executed anyone in 44 years and would become the 13th state without a death penalty..