(Gabriel Campanario / The Seattle Times)
Capital punishment applied inconsistently
On the one hand I can relate to Brian Moran’s position supporting the death penalty for Jonathan Gentry and others like him [“Should Washington state abolish the death penalty?” Opinion, Feb. 22]. Who doesn’t experience a desire for vengeance and retribution for such a heinous crime?
But I get stuck on some other realities of capital punishment, including those described by Eldon Vail and Dick Morgan, particularly the uneven way in which the death penalty is applied.
How is it that the most prolific killer in the state’s history — Gary Ridgway — escaped the death penalty? Was he the criminal-justice version of “too big to fail” — meaning that when you kill dozens of victims, rather than only one or two — there is more value in gaining information regarding all of the victims than in executing him for any one murder?
I applaud Gov. Jay Inslee for his courageous stand calling for a moratorium on executions, allowing for a renewed debate on this issue.
Janet Barbour Michaelsen, former superintendent Twin Rivers Corrections Center
Margin of error is too high
Dick Morgan and Eldon Vail’s guest column on the death penalty, though informative, left out a fundamental argument against the death penalty. The use of case reviews and the increasing implementation of DNA have shown that about 10 percent of inmates nationwide since 1976 have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence, according to the NAACP. While 1 percent is too much, 10 percent is unacceptable.