N.J. Assembly Votes To End Death Penalty

Governor's Signature Would Make State The First In Four Decades To Ban Executions

(AP)  The New Jersey Assembly approved legislation Thursday to abolish the state's death penalty, making Gov. Jon S. Corzine's signature the only step left before the state becomes the first in four decades to ban executions.

Assembly members voted 44-36 to replace the death sentence with life in prison without parole. The state Senate approved the bill Monday.

Corzine, a Democrat, has said he will sign the bill within a week.

The measure would spare eight men on the state's death row, including the sex offender whose crimes sparked Megan's Law.

A special state commission found in January that the death penalty was a more expensive sentence than life in prison, hasn't deterred murder and risks killing an innocent person.

"It's time New Jersey got out of the execution business," Democratic Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo said. "Capital punishment is costly, discriminatory, immoral and barbaric. We're a better state than one that puts people to death."

Among the death row inmates who would be spared is Jesse Timmendequas, a sex offender convicted of murdering 7-year-old Megan Kanka in 1994. That case sparked a Megan's Law, which requires law enforcement agencies to notify the public about convicted sex offenders living in their communities.

Senate Republicans had sought to retain the death penalty for those who murder law enforcement officials, rape and murder children, and terrorists, but the Senate rejected the idea.

Democrats control the state Legislature.

The nation has executed 1,099 people since the U.S. Supreme Court reauthorized the death penalty in 1976. In 1999, 98 people were executed, the most since 1976; last year 53 people were executed, the lowest since 1996.

Iowa and West Virginia halted executions in 1965. Other states have considered abolishing the death penalty recently, but none has advanced as far as New Jersey. According to the Washington-based Death Penalty Information Center, 37 states have the death penalty.

Bills to abolish the death penalty were recently approved by a Colorado House committee, the Montana Senate and the New Mexico House. But none of those bills has advanced.

The nation's last execution was Sept. 25 in Texas. Since then, executions have been delayed pending a U.S. Supreme Court decision on whether execution through lethal injection violates the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

[beehive21-2009]

NJ is full of low life,if anyone should be executing it NJ. This happens as the lawyers and court systems fulfill themselves with greed,why would a killer what to live ? Seems they should have the guts to call it quits,what? desires to live in prison there life.

[toolmangler-2009]

All you Christian Nuts would be wearing aa little gold Syringe around your necks. Maybe a little Electric chair.
Posted by jerryomara at 06:22 AM : Dec 14, 2007


Why??? the death penalty in those days was not supposed to be ''gentle'' and humane. The cross and hanging around for days was sufficient. If they wanted to be ''humane'' they would ''lop'' the offenders head off with one "whop".

[toolmangler-2009]

The idea for banning executions can be traced back to the Declaration. So why not?
Posted by jon2012 at 01:49 PM : Dec 14, 2007



So can anti-slavery. Legislation also said that these same rights may be stripped by law if you break it. They got around the slavery thing by declaring that negroes were not men.

[jon2012-2009]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
---Declaration of Independence

The idea for banning executions can be traced back to the Declaration. So why not?

[gunnerv1]

Just another case of the Politicans NOT doing the will of the people which is so typical. "We know what''s best for you".

[Krazcarl]

This is such a joke a life time in a cage is human with no female contact and lousy chow. We don''t need prisons we need to get rid of the criminals either deport them or exacute them these folks know wnen they break the law they won''t get medels.

[grammawhamma]

In my opinion, prison time for horrendous crimes should be a punishment that is not at all "pleasant" for the criminal. When sentenced to life in prison...let the prisoner have the option of "oppting out" by lethal injection when they decide they no longer want to live a life in prison. As for lethal injection being considered cruel and unusual punishment...oh please spare me!! Let a veterinarian do it...my pets never suffered when their time came.

[tbweb]

New Jersey should have executed the murderer who raped and killed 7 year old Megan first then implemented this Law, in fact this no death penalty Law should apply to all new cases and not be retroactive! I can''t believe the animal who raped and murdered 7 year old Megan is not being put to death. Some crimes like this one should be exempt from life in prison, only death will do in these cases! Megans family still has no closure, sad.

[brianbwb-2009]

"This only says ''''we don''''t trust our judges and juries to make good decisions." Posted by mguiling

Knowing from the undisputable mountain of evidence as to how easily judges and juries are swayed by factors such as "race" or economic status, It is only fitting that we don''t trust them with life or death matters.

[mguiling]

Anyone who thinks society is made more moral by not making moral decisions would support this. If there are problems in how the death penalty is implemented the state needs to deal with it. This only says ''we don''t trust our judges and juries to make good decisions.

Living in NJ I have come to expect this from our government. They are liberal with our money, but immoral in how they spend it.

[mguiling]

The answers.com links are a cool idea, but absolutely worthless as implemented. It assumes I need a definition of a word which is seldom the case. A really cool idea would be to select an entire name or phrase and get an answer.

[lloydbest1]

The controversy surrounding the application of the death penalty is based on two opposing premises:
1. No one, not even constitutional authority has the right to take a human life for any reason whatever.
2. Some people do such horrendous acts and commit such evil crimes that the only way we can really feel safe is to exterminate them.
I am not unconditionally opposed to the death penalty; I can think of some white collar criminals and politicals leaders that should be subjected to it should they ever be brought to justice.
On the other hand, we must also consider the only reasonable alternative to the death penalty. That is, a lifetime of strict incarceration with no possibility of parole. I can only speak for myself, but I would prefer to die. I believe killing these arch criminals is far more humane than warehousing them for fifty years and beyond. Yet, why on earth should we release anyone guilty of heinous offenses of their obligation to live with their evil and work perpetually to atone for their crimes by killing them? Keeping them alive but denying them of a life is a far more serious punishment than simply executing them.
We overuse the death penalty and I think we subject the wrong kinds of criminals to it but I also think (as in the cases I mentioned above) we should retain the machinery to eliminate our very worst.

[ajmystic]

I''m sorry. I just can''t understand how we can continue to take the "poor, misunderstood" criminals side. Did they even give a thought to how their victims felt or how the families would have to live with the end results of their actions? I think Texas has the right idea. And as far as lethal injection being cruel and inhuman punishment, let''s give them a choice. We put you to sleep and then kill you or we can put you in front of a firing squad or hang you. Then we will see how cruel and inhuman the injection becomes. I think any murderer should be killed in the same way they killed the victim. Knifed, shot, strangled, whatever. Sitting in jail is a lot more than they deserve. And we should also discontinue the 20 years of appeals after conviction. With the technology available today, it is almost 99% certain that the right person gets caught and convicted. If an innocent person gets convicted it is because someone misread the evidence.

[libsluvsuvs]

there should be an "adopt a convict'' program..there has to be an adoptive liberal to take a convict..when the convict kills again..we hold the liberal accountable and responsible for the act.

soon enough NJ will turn from ''sewer'' to ''sewer full of criminals''...

[toolmangler-2009]

I''''m afraid that I don''''t agree with your proposed approach.
Posted by FeelFree1 at 07:40 PM : Dec 13, 2007


You are different again, which Feelfree1 are you? you are talking like a complete stranger. We have crossed swords too many time for me not to notice.

[Krazcarl]

Why do folks see it as uncruel to let a man live out his days in a cage????

[feelfree1]

ToolMangler,

Re: "Murderers should be counciled and released, right feely or should we give them parole after a year and tell them "if you do it again, we are going to be "Verrrrrryyy angryyyyy" or are you one of these ''monsters'' that actually believes in "Life sentences w/out parole" or till they are driven insane so we can release them?"

I''m afraid that I don''t agree with your proposed approach.

[toolmangler-2009]

Murderers should be counciled and released, right feely or should we give them parole after a year and tell them "if you do it again, we are going to be "Verrrrrryyy angryyyyy" or are you one of these ''monsters'' that actually believes in "Life sentences w/out parole" or till they are driven insane so we can release them?

[feelfree1]

Re: "Governor''s Signature Would Make State The First In Four Decades To Ban Executions"

Good job, New Jersey!

It is high time to put an end to this barbaric practice.