Retired judge explains why executions have stopped in North Carolina

So Carl uh today there's a woman in Fayetteville

We've talked about it before but I know it's been

a minute

Um Avonte Devins she's accused of murdering her two adopted

children

Uh today we just saw the Rule 24 hearing where

the judge ruled that yes they the prosecution can seek

the death penalty but somebody asked a very valid question

Um if prosecutors know that the outcome of life in

prison versus the death penalty would be the same given

this de facto moratorium on executions in their state I

mean what's the point of even kind of prosecuting this

way Well you know I don't know that there's a

point to it as much as that whoever the prosecutor

is feels like this is a a serious very serious

and heinous case and has decided to seek the death

penalty because they have at least one aggravating factor which

is what is required to seek the death penalty

Um the fact that the moratorium is a de facto

moratorium

Uh it's it doesn't prevent prosecutors from seeking the death

penalty

What it just means is if someone gets the death

penalty their death penalty sentence is basically on hold

Uh and so there are there are over 100 inmates

right now on death row but they're not being executed

because there's there's all kinds of appeals about cruel unusual

punishment

Uh about discrimination because that most of the overwhelming majority

of of folks on the death row are African-American

And most of them are on the death penalty for

killing a white female uh which is what happens the

way you get on the death penalty the most of

the time or and and that's true for white males

is that that uh killing a white female uh is

the quickest route to getting the death penalty if there's

an aggravating factor whether it's black male or white male

Um and the the the real problem has been That

physicians have stopped uh participating in in executions

Normally physicians have been sort of overseeing executions uh and

because someone has to pronounce them dead and uh there's

the injection of the chemicals uh which is part of

the appeal on the cruel and unusual punishment part that

there is pain and suffering in having those chemicals injected

into you

And physicians are are sworn in their Hippocratic Oath to

do no harm and it's difficult for a physician to

say they aren't doing harm in participating in the execution

of another human being

So um those are sort of the the reasons why

it's de facto on hold but it doesn't prevent the

the state from seeking the death penalty even though it

may

Uh not occur and the fact of the matter is

that death penalties have not been sought nearly as much

since the state legislature passed a law um providing for

life without parole because one of the biggest arguments uh

about someone getting a sentence of life earlier was that

they'll be paroled at some point and be back out

in the community so that that argument went away when

When uh the legislature created the life without parole punishment

as a punishment for first-degree murder

So um that's the long and the short of it

So is is this a scenario where it's almost like

damned if you do damned if you don't in terms

of seeking it And I say that because if you

seek the death penalty but there's that de facto moratorium

in place they can let's say they're found guilty they're

sitting there on death row as you mentioned more than

100 inmates are currently in interstate

But if you don't pursue it then it's almost as

if you're not pursuing

Some people may view it as you're not the punishment

is not fitting the crime if you don't pursue it

So like is it kind of I don't know back

and forth or you know not following through on consequences

or It it well it it it can yeah it's

a little of both

I mean it's sort of a in some ways it's

sort of a catch-22 cause people think you know cause

someone looks at a case and I understand that and

says this is a terrible case this person deserves the

death penalty

I get that side of the coin

The other side of the coin though is that even

when people get the death penalty quite often the victim's

family members are not satisfied because they think the person

died that didn't suffer while they were dying

It doesn't change anything uh and so but it's hard

to argue the coin not to seek the side

Not to seek the death penalty if there are aggravating

factors and especially if there's more than one person killed

That that kind of thing when you have multiple people

killed that's that's probably the strongest or that someone's raped

or or robbed or tortured or something like that in

the process

Those are probably the most compelling arguments for the person

receiving the death penalty

And do you think maybe it's sending a message right

I mean the case I'm talking about I know you

can't talk specifically about it but we're talking about a

woman accused of killing her two adopted children but we're

talking about starving them to death being the two things

here

Um is it sending a message Because uh the district

attorney is saying that it's a lot more of a

complex process to seek the death penalty

Well I mean you you can say that I'm saying

basically this is a horrible crime and it it deserves

the death penalty when you're doing that but the cost

of it goes up dramatically because it's more difficult to

see the death penalty jury so there's a lot there's

a lot more jurors in trying a death penalty case

and the appeals they cost by the time the case

gets to

Execution you spent millions of dollars and the cost of

it if you're talking about just a cost basis it's

much higher than to seek the death penalty and have

somebody on death row and executed than it is to

have them serve life without parole

So it's really a You know it's it just depends

on your view of things and if you don't you

know you don't when you're a prosecutor you're not looking

at the cost-benefit thing

You're looking at the crime

Does this deserve the death penalty Do I have an

aggravating factor and is it likely that I'll get the

death penalty in in the place where I where I'm

prosecuting it Lastly and this is cause I thought about

it um this happened last month I believe the the

Trump administration had the announcement that the Justice Department is

going to they as they say take actions to strengthen

the federal death penalty

And one of the things mentioned was including Additional manners

of execution such as firing squad

Now when you mentioned how physicians have an issue with

the chemical part of it do you think that there's

a possibility you know if let's say the firing squad

part came back that other states the states might follow

and that they would say well OK this isn't the

chemical part of it this is just a bullet

Yeah well you're still I think you're still gonna there's

still gonna be some requirement that someone pronounce them dead

And and that's where the physicians quite often come in

Although I guess a paramedic could be substituted for doing

that and you wouldn't have that issue with someone who's

a paramedic um

I don't know exactly whether they take an oath or

not and just to be real honest with you

And you know maybe the person does not suffer the

same way in front of a firing squad

I mean you know they do by hanging and I

know there's I think there's at least one state in

the western part of the country that does have firing

squads

Um but you know you've got to assume that everybody

and and I'm I suspect that the people chosen for

a firing squad are chosen because they are excellent marks

marksmen and the the issue is not not they're going

to hit the target and they're going to kill the

person

And uh and it's it's quick and if they do

it uh The way we would expect him to do

it it would be relatively I don't know how painful

it would be

I can't say that but it certainly generally speaking tends

to be more rapid than than lethal injection or hanging

or some of the other alternatives or electrocution