By Catherine Ednie, Stamford
My brother David Froehlich and four of his friends were murdered in Georgetown, Connecticut, in April 1995. The crime was horrifying and traumatic for our family, four other families, and the whole extended community. It has been called one of the “worst mass murders” in Connecticut. Although the prosecutor considered the death penalty, the eventual decision was not to seek death for my brother’s murderer. It was a decision that still troubles me and strengthens my opposition to the death penalty.
At the time, I was relieved that the death penalty was not applied. After five funerals in one week, I did not see how one more death would help anything. It certainly wouldn’t bring my brother back, or heal my pain. It would have made the trial even more difficult, sensational, and painful. It would have set the stage for years of appeals, with the accompanying media spotlight, notoriety for the perpetrator, and fresh pain for the families.
But now when I hear people say we need the death penalty for the “worst of the worst,” I always want to respond “But what about my brother?” I suppose there are legal rationales and justifications that attempt to explain why the prosecutors did not seek the death penalty in this mass murder of five promising young men. But for me as an ordinary citizen, and as a sister, the decision seems arbitrary and capricious. Ranking murders seems a bizarre exercise, guaranteed to be subject to all kinds of personal and political biases and pressures.
The death penalty creates two classes of murders, those that are “worth” the death penalty and those that are not. This is divisive and hurtful to family members of murder victims. It is impossible to categorize the murder of a loved one as “bad, worse, worst.”
When I hear other murder victims’ family members tell the story of their loss, my heart breaks for us all equally. To each of us, our loss is truly the “worst of the worst.”
God bless you and your family. No one can even fathom the pain of losing a loved one. But what’s worse is not having someone to talk to, someone that can help you try and understand all of these feelings that you can’t comprehend. I pray for our sanity on a daily basis…..I pray for us all.
The post “What about my brother” captures the futility of ranking murders and singling out “the worst of the worst” for execution by the state. The death penalty must be thrown out by our elected representatives in Connecticut; our society is fully and fairly protected by a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. No murder is anything less than horrific–whether committed by an individual or by the state in the name of its citizens. Bill Bachrach
Connecticut victims’ families opposing the death penalty: Much more harm than good
Dudley Sharp
The Connecticut Victim’s Families Speaking Out Against the Death Penalty (CVFADP) are Connecticut family members of murder victims who actively oppose the death penalty and are seeking its repeal.
I oppose their efforts, which are, intentionally, divisive and hurtful for murder victim survivors who believe differently.
My contention is that all death penalty arguments are either false or that the pro death penalty arguments are stronger. The CVFADP confirms those findings.
Based upon polling, about 80% support the death penalty for truly death penalty eligible murders, making it likely that over 90% of those who have lost loved ones to murder support the death penalty as a just sanction (1).
For example, of the 2000 or so folks who lost loved ones in the Oklahoma City bombing case, I am aware of only one that opposes and actively fights the death penalty. How many of the 30,000 or so of those who lost loved ones on 9/11 spoke out against the death of Osama Bin Laden?
The CVFADP, a vast minority, are attempting to stop justice for the vast majority. In addition, I suspect the vast minority of CVFADP membership are survivors of crimes which are death penalty eligible.
Instead of being divisive and hurtful, why can’t the CVFADP just say, “we oppose the death penalty, but respect your right to support the death penalty in your case.”? CVFADP won’t support other victims in that fashion because their sole goal is to get rid of the death penalty, not helping any victims who feel differently but, in fact, working against them.
Instead, the CVFADP are, actively, seeking to deny that right to those who find the death penalty just. Thus, the CVFADP are, intentionally hurtful and divisive, when they need not be.
The CVFADP claims that the death penalty makes some murder victims more or less valuable than others, by the degree of punishment.
As with all states, there are many different legal levels of criminal homicide (non negligent, involuntary, etc. . . . all the way to felony or capital murders) with sanctions ranging from probation to the death penalty.
The CVFADP has had no discussions about consolidating all criminal homicides into one category with one sanction. That shows how disingenuous and silly this argument by CVFADP is.
The CVFADP complains about the length and cost of death penalty appeals and how that injures, even more.
Such delay and cost are the result of anti death penalty legislators and other activists, who have prevented reasonable reforms. Again, the CVFADP, now, joins those causing additional pain and cost.
The Virginia protocol allows for executions in 7.1 years, on average, with 75% of those so sentenced being executed. Such a protocol in Ct would cost far less than LWOP.
The CVFADP complain that murderers become celebrities. Who makes them celebrities? Anti death penalty activists. Many murderers become celebrities without the death penalty being present. Stop doing it.
The death penalty allows for a plea bargain to a life sentence, preventing a trial, saving some such family members a trial and giving the option of such plea bargains having a sentence with no parole – an option which goes away when there is no death penalty.
Thus, the CVFADP efforts, if successful, will increase both costs and pain.
The CVFADP states the death penalty is not a deterrent. Anyone who has considered deterrence is aware that all prospects of a negative outcome deter some. It is a truism. It is impossible, by truth and reason, to say “The death penalty deters none.” The only question is “How much does it deter?” There are 28 studies finding for deterrence since 2000 (2), all of which disagree as to the degree of deterrence.
The death penalty is a greater protector of innocent lives, in at least three ways (3).
Therefore, the CVFADP is asking to spare all murderers lives at the cost of sacrificing more innocents.
The strongest argument for the death penalty? Justice, the foundation of support for all sanctions.
Let’s direct our attention where it belongs, against those anti death penalty obstructionists, and create a just, responsible death penalty system that honors justice and stops the additional and preventable re victimization, caused by death penalty opponents, now joined by CVFADP.
1) US death penalty support about 80%
Dudley Sharp, 10/27/11
Many of the polls ask about death penalty support for murder, which results in support ranging from 56-83%.
However, when, properly, asking about truly death penalty eligible murders, as opposed to all murders, support is, consistently, at 80%.
For example, when Gallup asks about truly death penalty eligible murders, Gallup found death penalty opposition falls by 43% and support rose by 25% (a), which would mean 77% support and 20% opposition using Gallup’s 10/6-9/11 poll.
REVIEW:
80% US death penalty support, 12% opposed – 10/4/11 poll
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44070/most-americans-prefer-the-death-penalty-for-convicted-murderers/
83% US death penalty support, 13% opposed – 11/10/10 poll
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/43498/americans-support-punishing-murder-with-the-death-penalty/
Using only relevant death penalty eligible murders, death penalty opposition falls 43% and death penalty support rises by 25%, as with —
For Timothy McVeigh’s (the Oklahoma City bomber’s) execution, 81% supported his execution, with 16% opposed (Gallup 5/02/01), while 65% offer general support for executions for “murder”, with 28% opposed (Gallup, 6/10/01). The polls were conducted at nearly the same time.
More evidence of the significant rise in death penalty support, for truly death eligible murders.
(“Death Penalty Support Remains Very High: USA & The World”
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-polls-support-remains.html
(2) a) 28 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm
b) “Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock”
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx
c) “Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let’s be clear”
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalty-deterrence-murder-rates.html
(3) Of all human endeavors that put innocents at risk, is there one with a better record of sparing innocent lives than the US death penalty? Unlikely.
a) “The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx
b) Opponents in capital punishment have blood on their hands, Dennis Prager, 11/29/05, http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2005/11/29/opponents_in_capital_punishment_have_blood_on_their_hands
c) “A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection”, Lester Jackson Ph.D.,
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A
Thank you for taking the time to post. i disagree with your arguments, but I appreciate your attention to the issue. I will be brief in my reply because I think there are often irreconcilable differences in a death penalty discussion.
You reference the term “death penalty eligible” like it is clear what that means. One of the most difficult matters for the law is defining what is death penalty eligible.
Based on my experience, most responders to polls about the death penalty are reacting quickly and emotionally, and are oftentimes ignorant of the realities of a capital case. Victims’ family members on the other hand have lived through the process and have a lot of wisdom to share. Why discount their voices in favor of polls? This is one big reason I feel a responsibility to speak up as a victim’s family member. If people were educated about the realities of the process, we might see very different results from polls.
The term “justice” does not constitute a rationale for the death penalty. If we want to see justice, I would prefer to focus on a more just distribution of state resources to help victims of violent crimes.
Let’s say theoretically that we choose the path of reforms to address our broken death penalty system (I say broken objectively, because CT so rarely executes). How much more time and effort would it take to craft these reforms in the legislature? Do we really think we could accomplish it here, when the many states in the USA and the majority of countries in the world don’t even attempt it? How would we avoid the risk of executing an innocent with these reforms? How many more years of tinkering with the reform process before we acknowledge that it can’t be done? I would hate to see CT as a state go down that path.
I am terrbly sorry for the murder of your brother.
Thank you, I appreciate that.