Hamilton: State attempting to restart highly flawed execution process

Listen to this article

Although oft-agonizing and painful, Oklahoma’s collective conversation about Julius Jones’ fate is important and valuable.

The state has a long and increasingly complicated history with capital punishment, all-too-often disproportionately assessed against people of color and of meager means.

It also has demonstrated an appalling ineptitude when it comes to carrying out death sentences – bungled executions yielding a moratorium that’s lasted six years so far.

Regrettably, Oklahoma’s new attorney general, John O’Connor, is itching to get the conveyor belt rolling again. He’s petitioning the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to set seven execution dates, including Jones’.

Doubts about whether Jones committed the murder for which he was convicted and/or got a fair shake in an all-too-often unequal justice system is rekindling dialogue over whether vengeance should remain a weapon of the state.

While polls indicate a majority of Oklahomans still support capital punishment, recent criminal justice reform successes – both at the ballot box and in the Legislature – reflect a broader understanding that it’s a flawed system, at best.

Consider this sobering reality: It’s likely some of the 192 executed since statehood were innocent. Since The New York-based Innocence Project and Oklahoma City University’s Oklahoma Innocence Project began digging into wrongful conviction claims, 34 Oklahoma inmates have been exonerated, including seven on death row.

That’s seven lives the state mistakenly could have snuffed out had not dogged investigators, DNA technology and other 21st-century tools uncovered the truth.

One is too many. Seven is unthinkable. And unconscionable.

State Pardon and Parole Board Chair Adam Luck no doubt spoke for many Oklahomans when he detailed his support for the board’s recommendation that Jones’ punishment be commuted to a life sentence with the possibility of parole:

“Personally, I believe in death penalty cases there should be no doubts. And put simply, I have doubts about this case.”

Jones’ conviction still stands, of course. The board’s action didn’t change that. What’s left for Gov. Kevin Stitt to decide is whether the death sentence should be carried out or modified.

That decision should not – must not – be made only through the prism of Jones’ case. It’s time for the governor, state lawmakers and rank-and-file Oklahomans to consider whether the death penalty is a punishment whose time has passed.

We already know of wrongful convictions. We already know the harshest sentences are disproportionately applied. And we know it’s far less costly to warehouse an inmate for life than to litigate the long death penalty appeals process.

It’s important not to be sidetracked by the likes of Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater, whose frothing rant after the 3-1 parole board decision was unbecoming an elected official who’s charged with seeking the truth and prosecuting accordingly.

Maybe Jones did commit murder. I have no idea. Neither does the Pardon and Parole Board. Or the governor and attorney general.

But it gives pause to consider that his prosecution occurred when Bob Macy was DA. Macy’s deserved reputation was he never let the facts stand in the way of notching another death sentence in his belt.

The point? It’s an imperfect system, designed and carried out by imperfect humans. Mistakes are inevitable.

As we’ve seen far too many times, all the official apologies and all the zeroes on taxpayer-funded settlement checks can’t give the wrongly convicted back the years lost to incarceration. Meanwhile, a death sentence is forever.

That’s why this conversation is so important. Oklahomans don’t want innocent blood on their hands. It’s time to permanently retire the executioner.

Arnold Hamilton is editor of The Oklahoma Observer; okobserver.org.