Death Sentence

PrintPrintE-MailE-Mail ""Share

Times Daily
July 5, 2008

EDITORIAL

THE ISSUE: A United Nations report suggests elected judges in Alabama may be overruling jury recommendations of life in prison without parole in capital murder cases for political reasons.

It seems Alabama's antiquated way of conducting public business has captured the attention of the United Nations, which issued a report this week suggesting elected judges are handing down death sentences in capital murder cases against the wishes of juries.

A report by special investigator Philip Alston of the U.N.'s Human Rights Council alleges elected judges override jury recommendations for sentences of life in prison without parole in capital cases in order to boost their standing among law and order voters. Alabama Attorney General Troy King described the report as a "serious allegation" lacking factual backing.

But in truth, judges have gone against juries' recommendations of sentences of life in prison without parole in capital murder cases and imposed death sentences. Alabama law allows judges that discretion, but we question the wisdom of it.

In cases where a defendant is convicted of capital murder, the jury makes a sentencing recommendation to the judge. Unless a judge can find a compelling reason to impose a death sentence, the jury's recommendation should be followed.

The Constitution states that those charged with crimes are to be tried by a jury of their peers. It's one of the safeguards built into our legal system to prevent drumhead courts from unfairly imprisoning those accused of crimes.

King, the attorney general, told the Birmingham News that judges are more qualified than juries to determine whether a death sentence is appropriate. Yes, judges have a better understanding of the fine points of the law than average citizens, but if a jury of 12 men and women can apply the law and deliver a verdict, they are certainly capable of making the appropriate sentencing recommendation in capital cases.

This portion of Alabama's judicial code needs review.