Last updated on: 11/11/2008 | Author: ProCon.org

New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission Biography

Position:
Con to the question "Should the Death Penalty Be Allowed?"
Reasoning:

“The Commission recommends that the death penalty in New Jersey be abolished and replaced with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, to be served in a maximum security facility. The Commission also recommends that any cost savings resulting from the abolition of the death penalty be used for benefits and services for survivors of victims of homicide.”

New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission Report (485KB),” Jan. 2, 2007

Theoretical Expertise Ranking:
  Organizations/VIPs/Others
Individuals and organizations that do not fit into the other star categories.
Description:

“The New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission was created in 2006 by the New Jersey Legislature. The commission’s final report, issued on January 2, 2007, recommended that the death penalty be abolished and replaced with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The Legislature abolished the death penalty on December 17, 2007 by the enactment of (P.L.2007,c204).”

“Overview of the Commission and its Work – Establishment,” New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission website (accessed Oct. 13, 2008)

Mission:

“The commission was charged with studying all aspects of the death penalty as administered in the State of New Jersey, including but not limited to the following issues:
(1) whether the death penalty rationally served a legitimate penological intent such as deterrence;
(2) whether there was a significant difference between the cost of the death penalty from indictment to execution and the cost of life in prison without parole;
(3) whether the death penalty was consistent with evolving standards of decency;
(4) whether the selection of defendants in New Jersey for capital trials was arbitrary, unfair, or discriminatory in any way and there was unfair, arbitrary, or discriminatory variability in the sentencing phase or at any stage of the process;
(5) whether there was a significant difference in the crimes of those selected for the punishment of death as opposed to those who receive life in prison;
(6) whether the penological interest in executing some of those guilty of murder was sufficiently compelling that the risk of an irreversible mistake was acceptable; and
(7) whether alternatives to the death penalty existed that would sufficiently ensure public safety and address other legitimate social and penological interests, including the interests of families of victims.

P.L.2005, c.321 required the commission to report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature, along with any legislation it desired to recommend for adoption by the Legislature, no later than November 15, 2006.”

“Overview of the Commission and its Work – Establishment,” New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission website (accessed Oct. 13, 2008)

Other:
None found
Quoted in:
  1. Should Victims' Opinions Matter When Considering the Death Penalty?