Repeal of Death Penalty Gives Murderers Taxpayer Funded Room and Board

By Assemblyman Joe Pennacchio

In 1994 Jesse Timmednequas, a repeat sex offender, who had been released from prison raped and strangled seven-year-old Megan Kanka, a crime he was convicted for in May of 1997.  In January 2001, Brian Wakefield pleaded guilty to brutally murdering Richard Hazard, 70, and his 65‑year‑old wife, Shirley in their Pleasantville home and then setting the house on fire. Wakefield repeatedly stabbed Mrs. Hazard numerous times ensuring a violent death.

None of us can imagine the terror those three victims endured at the hands of their assailants. And certainly, unless we have walked in those same shoes, none of us can even begin to imagine the pain and heartache the families of those victims endure every day of their lives as a result of their loss.

A just society dictates that the punishment should fit the crime. Yet in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court said the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment. As a result of that ruling, states were required to put the procedures for imposing the death penalty under microscopic scrutiny to ensure that such punishment was not metered out in a cruel and unusual way. States were, in essence, required to bend over backwards to ensure that convicted murderers were given every possible avenue for appeal.

Despite the ruling, ten years later the New Jersey Legislature reinstated the state's death penalty and in 1992 voters overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the state constitution that affirmed the death penalty was not cruel or unusual punishment.

However over the last several years in New Jersey liberal judges, prodded by the state Legislature's liberal agenda, have taken it upon themselves to rewrite our Constitution. The judges totally ignored the Legislative and voter mandate when the state courts imposed a moratorium on executions in 2004.

Last year, a 13‑member Democrat‑controlled commission was established to study every aspect of the death penalty and to no ones surprise, the Death Penalty Study Commission on Tuesday recommended that New Jersey repeal capital punishment and replace it with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. What is the basis for their findings? That the death penalty serves no purpose.

How could they possibly know it serves no purpose?   New Jersey has had a death penalty law on the books for years yet it hasn't been utilized since 1963.  How can they conclude that it isn't an effective deterrent when it hasn't been used in more than four decades?

What we have here is yet another classic example of the State's radical agenda being shoved down the throats of New Jersey residents by a few liberal legislators and judges who are intent on imposing their views on the majority. And that is exactly what will happen. Already, Democrat leaders in Trenton are preparing to introduce legislation to abolish capital punishment while death penalty opponent Governor Jon Corzine eagerly waits in the wings, pen in hand.  Will they also abolish the Death penalty for the innocent unborn?

The commission also defended its findings saying that the death penalty is "inconsistent with evolving standards of decency." Where is the "decency" afforded to murder victims?

I challenge you to think about someone like seven‑year‑old Megan Kanka and how a twice‑convicted pedophile terrorized that little, innocent girl. Try to imagine the terror and pain she endured at the hands of this animal who lured her to his home on the premise of seeing his puppy. Think about the way she was violated and then murdered. Was there anything decent about this act that this criminal should be shown mercy? Rather, what Timmednequas did to that youngster ‑ wasn't that cruel and unusual? How would you feel if she were your daughter? Problem is most people don't want to think about that. They don't want to think about how murder victims suffer and how the families that are left behind are subjected to a life of pain and heartache.

Certainly, our liberal elected officials and judges don't think about that. They are more concerned with protecting the rights of criminals than having justice served for their victims. Case in point ‑ cop killer Thomas Trantino who brutally murdered Lodi police officers Gary Tedesco and Peter Voto. Through our liberal court system, Trantino is now a free man.

For those who would receive life without parole, should the death penalty be abolished?  These liberal officials would rather see those who murder and terrorize, including terrorists who carry out attacks killing hundreds of innocent people, essentially receive life‑time taxpayer‑funded room and board, which includes three hot meals daily along with privileges such as exercise rooms, television, and reading materials. Many study and receive college degrees while in prison. Yet Megan Kanka was never even given the opportunity to graduate elementary school.