Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf has imposed a moratorium on implementation of the death penalty.
Governor Wolf recently granted a reprieve or stay of an individual who was convicted of first degree murder, and was on death row.
Pennsylvania has only had 3 executions in the last 30 years or so.
The question for today’s blog is do you support the actions of Governor Wolf in placing a moratorium on the death penalty in
There certainly are strong arguments on both sides of this issue.
Many people believe that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to future killings of innocent victims.
They point to the fact that if a person is legally convicted of first degree murder and is sentenced to death, that sentencing should be carried out.
Death penalty proponents further argue that carrying out a sentence that is legal and has been reviewed extensively, is the only way to insure consistency in the application of the death penalty.
There is a lot of support for this argument.
Opponents of the death penalty have valid arguments too. People who oppose the death penalty claim that it is administered randomly, illogically and with a bias toward minorities.
They argue that a lot of times, whether a person is sentenced to death or not, has to do with who they have as an attorney.
Rich, affluent defendants accused of heinous acts seldom if ever are sentenced to death.
But minorities with inadequate or substandard legal representation often do receive the death penalty.
What is your opinion on this hugely important issue?
Pittsburgh Wrongful Death, Car Accident and Criminal Attorney Bernie Tully has mixed feelings on this whole death penalty issue.
One thing that seems pretty clear to me about the whole
death penalty issue is there has to be a better way to streamline the appeal process of individuals who are sentenced to death.
Maybe the better answer is for them to serve life in prison as most countries in the world do these days. Maybe it isn’t the better answer. Who knows?
When you have a case where an individual has been filing appeals for over 30 years, it does cause serious questions to arise about the implementation of the death penalty.
I think some of you are aware of the 1979 Lesko and Travaglia Kill for Thrill cases. Incredibly the cases are still going on 35 years later!
Regardless of what your position is on the death penalty, that period of a time is just too unreasonable.
Well that is how I view it.
The more important point, though, is how do you view it?
Thanks for reading.
Hope your day is a happy one.
Bernie the Attorney