prosecutors' moral duty

[eub]

NYT story:
A prosecutor was trying to block a death row inmate from having his conviction reopened on the basis of new evidence, and Judge Stith, of the Missouri Supreme Court, was getting exasperated. "Are you suggesting," she asked the prosecutor, that "even if we find Mr. Amrine is actually innocent, he should be executed?"

Frank A. Jung, an assistant state attorney general, replied, "That's correct, your honor."
[...]
Mr. Jung, the Missouri prosecutor, told the court that Mr. Amrine's request was simply too late.

"To make sure we are clear on this," Judge Michael A. Wolff of the Supreme Court replied, "if we find in a particular case that DNA evidence absolutely excludes somebody as the murderer, then we must execute them anyway if we can't find an underlying constitutional violation at their trial?"

Again, Mr. Jung said yes.

Mr. Jung did not return a call seeking comment. His boss, Mr. Nixon, the state's attorney general, said clemency proceedings rather than courts were the right forum for claims like Mr. Amrine's. He added that prosecutors had a moral duty to evaluate claims like Mr. Amrine's, which he said he found wanting.

Comments

[thatmathchick.livejournal.com]

I get more opposed to the death penalty with age. It seems so barbaric, and perhaps the US might clue in to the fact that not many industrialized nations have the death penalty (are there any others?).

Moral issues aside, it seems spectacularly unlikely to me that the US can enact it fairly and accurately.

Also reminds me how once one is in a public position, even calculus teacher, it is imperative to think before speaking.