Consider, too, that although the system costs states millions of dollars, even some law enforcement officials question whether the death penalty reduces violent crime.
Now, a legal challenge has come in Philadelphia that makes the compelling argument that taxpayers should be spending even more on the system because it currently shortchanges indigent defendants fighting for their lives.
The claim lodged last week before Common Pleas Court Judge Benjamin Lerner argues that Philadelphia scrimps on the cost of providing court-appointed death-penalty lawyers who have to prepare for complex and sometimes lengthy trials.
In the event that a defendant is convicted, the counsel then has to launch into another process to mount a defense during the penalty phase of a trial, which determines whether the death penalty will be imposed.
Philadelphia, the lawsuit contends, "pays its court-appointed attorneys less to prepare a capital case than any remotely comparable jurisdiction in the country." One attorney estimates that he earns the equivalent of $10 an hour, given the pay rates and the actual work involved.
It's no wonder that national studies have shown poor and minority defendants face a death-penalty sentence more often than better-off counterparts. The adage that you get what you pay for is especially true when it comes to legal representation.
While most, but fewer, Americans still support capital punishment, they do so with the understanding that the system must be administered fairly. A system that underpays counsel for indigent defendants isn't fair.
Properly funding court-appointed lawyers no doubt won't sit well with elected officials trying to balance budgets. But if they won't abolish the death penalty and refuse to increase defense-counsel fees, then that in its self would represent yet another powerful indictment against capital punishment in the Keystone State.
